Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • 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.   
  • 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

Sending repeat sick note


riget
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4077 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'm appealing ESA and have had a letter saying the sick note is about to run out and need to send a new one before the 20th, but my doctor says they can't issue another till the old one runs out on the 20th, so it will be impossible to get it there on time, do they stop payment on the day they say, or will they give it a few days?

 

Also the DWP have arranged to see me saying they need to check my benefit claims, but they never mentioned ESA, and when I asked what it was about they just said it's to check the information they have and maybe something else, if it was about my ESA appeal would they have to say, or could it be they are just checking the information they have.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:riget:

 

Government guidance to doctors about Med 3 (unfit) notes isn't as clear as it could be and doctors don't always read such guidance as there is. Credit where it's due; your doctor's realised s/he can issue sick notes pending your appeal hearing. Gaps between sick notes can be problematic but overlapping notes are fine. Also, if necessary, a Med 3 can be backdated. Worst case senario for you is the possibility that your next payment may be a couple of days late if Jobcentreplus are waiting for a note before they can issue payment.

 

Unlikely that Work n Pensions want to discuss your appeal. Far more likely to be a routine check, from a Benefits Integrity Centre or a compliance team, that everything's as it should be with your claim.

 

Regards, Margaret.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply, the overlapping sounds about right, like when I did mot's, you can't predate them but nothing to stop you doing another before that one runs out, I'll ring the doctors again!

 

Yes looking at the letter it does say, "customer compliance".

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply, the overlapping sounds about right, like when I did mot's, you can't predate them but nothing to stop you doing another before that one runs out, I'll ring the doctors again!

 

Yes looking at the letter it does say, "customer compliance".

 

Thanks.

 

Yes, I'm sure Margaret is correct here - Compliance would not call to discuss your appeal. Indeed, it would not be at all common for anyone to call regarding your appeal.

 

Re your med cert, again yes, there's no issue from a DWP point of view if certs overlap, and there's nothing to stop a doctor from issuing a cert prior to the expiry of the old one. As you say, they can't date it in the future, but that's not really the same thing.

 

If your cert expires on the 20th, the computer will withhold payments as of the 21st. Processors can't override this, but if you subsequently supply a new cert your payments will restart and any money not paid will be issued once said new cert is processed. To keep things simple, you'd want the new cert to be dated from the 21st at the latest, since under normal circumstances every day of your ESA claim must be covered by medical evidence until you are found to have LCW by the DWP or the Tribunal.

 

One exception to this: a gap in evidence of up to 10 days can be accepted provided that this is not your first cert.

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

you may have already done this, but an email or quick phone call to the practise manager, all surgeries have one I understand, often sorts it out. Just a suggestion as thinking of anything that could help. As a sufferer of anxiety this situation would have me fretting and pacing all weekend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to update this, had a phone call 30 minutes ago from reception, another doctor has decided he will do it, then 5 minutes ago, another call, he's changed his mind and now will not do it, so I have to wait till Monday for original doctor to do it.

 

How does the world keep spinning?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope you get it sorted, riget. I have been sending the DWP (un)fit notes every three months for over four years now. As you have discovered, there is no problem with sending them in a little early, in fact that is recommended practice. The computer system will not allow payment to be generated for any period not covered by your note.

So, I always diary when mine is due to run out and get a new one at least a week to ten days before that happens. This allows time for it to be posted, received and processed. Do not rely on the DWP to remind you. When they do, it's usually too close to the date it runs out and sometimes they don't remind you at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to be an area GP's have discretion in. I have personally never managed to get a GP to provide a new sick note before the old one expired, but the DWP's practice to me is unusual, the best bet is as I said before ring and ask for a grace period explaining why.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to be an area GP's have discretion in. I have personally never managed to get a GP to provide a new sick note before the old one expired, but the DWP's practice to me is unusual, the best bet is as I said before ring and ask for a grace period explaining why.

 

That is highly unlikely to work - ESA cannot be paid without a sick note where one is required. There is no way a processor can offer a grace period.

 

Now, admittedly, it's been a couple of years since I would spend several days a week running sick notes into the system, and the rules may have changed. The current, and unfortunate, political climate leads me to believe that if the rules have changed they won't have become more lenient.

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

it worked for me, I was given grace periods multiple times.

 

There was even that occasion where I got a letter informing me I had been paid 6-8 weeks worth of IB without a sicknote and asking me for a hugely backdated sicknote, I panicked, posted on here, estellyn informed me I shouldnt even be sending sick notes and I then managed to get it corrected. But that showed the system can have payments going with out of date sick notes.

 

Of course that was IB and is possible ESA has some kind of blocker where noone can overide it. If it does then thats just stupid. There has to be room for dscretion and common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...