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

'Why I went to court for my disability payments'


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2539 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

'Why I went to court for my disability payments'

 

The number of people going to court to try to win back a key disability benefit is expected to continue to rise this year, a leaked letter seen by the BBC suggests. We follow one woman who took her case to tribunal.

 

Debbie Neal was diagnosed with a rare kidney disease 10 years ago. She takes dozens of pills each morning to manage her symptoms - sickness, high blood pressure and seizures.

 

She may well need a transplant in future.

 

For the moment, she has to empty excess fluid from a tube attached to her stomach, and replace it with new liquid from a bag, five times a day.

 

"It is a burden," she tells the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme. "They say, 'Don't let it affect your life,' but you can only live your life to a point.

 

"I can't even remember what it was like not doing it."

 

READ MORE HERE: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39745403

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an awful system. It should go back to the way it was. Yes, I only received lower mobility DLA, (about £36 a week less) but there was logic there.

 

There's no logic here at all. How can you decide in 30 minutes - 1 hour what someone's disabilities are really like? It was decided somehow, I don't have hearing problems because I wasn't saying pardon every 2 minutes. So, why the hell do I have so many letters from ENT / Audiology then?

 

DWP don't believe I have any difficulties communicating. Yet. the friend who was present and both parents will tell you the opposite.

 

I now find myself in the crap situation of my needs have changed; but knowing how illogical they are, (I've come across people who've said their conditions have become worse, informed DWP and they've lost everything) I may have to leave it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nystagmite - I imagine there are many people who are frightened to say their conditions have worsened JIC the assessors decide otherwise and the applicant will lose what they already have - so they simply stay under the radar - suffering !

 

 

Very wrong indeed.

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Nystagmite I too have issues communicating at a normal level in the real world. Unless I can spend hours/days/weeks and sometimes months studying a response, 'live' conversations on standard topics crucify me big time,, but when allowed to study for a time I can deal with it. Probably like you I get very confused very quickly then turn mean, because I cannot be fully understood properly....

 

 

Here we can take time that others can do instantly, this is why it is difficult for us and I hate to use this word 'normal' people take it for granted that we too are 'normal' but sadly we are not...

 

 

citizenB: I fully agree with what you say, one day I can do a thing easily then the next I cannot, that is the long and short of it. Simply put if the DWP continue to assume that every condition is written down and EVERYONE is affected the same way then things will continue to deteriorate for the claimant.

 

 

We are not a book that states this IS what it is we are individuals and different as are our disabilities....

 

 

Simply put how can we prove a negative?

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of what you're saying sounds familiar, Mikey. Unfortunately for me, I was seen on a "good day". The assessment did not take into account that there's a huge difference between sitting in a quiet room with 2 people (assessor and friend) and normal everyday life where you're sat in a room with maybe several people and quite a lot of noise. (such as doctor's waiting room) The latter being physically painful for me. But no, because the former is ok, I've got no such issues, apparently.

 

I have a long list of rare medical problems (I was even asked what one of them was...) and I know they don't have a clue what they are.

 

Like you, most of my conditions vary. DWP unaccepted this under DLA (they wrote this on my award notice) but not under PIP it seems. Everything appeared to be based on that one day when I appeared to be functioning ok. You can't make a decision based on that. My hospital letters pretty much stated the opposite. They were written over several appointments. (roughly 1-2 months apart)

 

Because of the way the questions were worded, (you have to word things in a certain way for me to understand them) it was assumed I have no problems with language. But my friend said I take things literally. Actually, most people who know me will tell you the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...