Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
  • 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

Ingeus


Raven1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2457 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

I receive ESA

 

Ah. Was hoping you wouldn't say that - although I used to be an ESA processor, I left before the WP got involved. What I'll do, though, is send a message to one of our WP watchers asking if he knows. He checks in on this thread often anyhow.

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

  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I receive ESA

 

WRAG or Support Group ?

Do you have any full time carer responsibilities towards children under five, other ESA claimants, or elderly relatives ?

 

If the answers are WRAG and no carer responsibilities, then I'd suggest looking at Annex 3 of http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wp-pg-chapter-3a-22-october-2012.pdf - If the letter does not conform to the prescribed template and instead uses text intended for JSA claimants, you have grounds to challenge it.

 

As you have a sick note from your GP*, the standard advice would be to notify the JCP and the WP provider using a JSA28 form. But this is intended for claimants on JSA, not ESA - I would strongly suggest calling your local JCP office and asking what the equivalent ESA form is. If they can not provide the form, I'd suggest writing a short letter to both the WP provider and the DWP/JCP informing them of your inability to attend. This would come under the heading of "a change in circumstances" and fulfil the requirements set out in http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wp-pg-chapter-5.pdf .

 

*) Just a thought: Does the sick note just say "do not operate machinery or drive" or does it go further and confine you to the house ?

If the former and you find there is no way out, then you must be accompanied by an advocate to ensure that you are not subjected to undue pressure (and as always, record the meeting in full).

 

Much of the DWP guidance for Work Programme providers is geared towards JSA claimants, and it is often difficult to pick out which sections do not apply to ESA claimants - In these cases, it is worth getting written clarification from the DWP/JCP.

Edited by Mr.P

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one year at Ingeus done. I think over the past year I must have been called in about 6 times (im on ESA WRAG).

 

The last time I was there (last week) there was a whole group of young folks who must have been in their 20's... all lined up for some interview with some serious looking bloke in a suit.

 

I see my adviser one more time and then apparently i get moved to the "Second Stage" which involves me going to a group meeting with other folks on ESA and then getting a new adviser. Kinda will miss my old adviser :(

 

I think the Ingeus place I go to is empty most of the time...was usually only me, one person at a computer doing jobsearch and a whole bunch of staff sitting around chatting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was put forward for a minimum wage admin role working for a company in partnership with Ingeus. My advisor told me I was perfect for the role and would breeze through any interview. It was an'easy win'.

 

Just recieved an email that I after careful consideration of my CV (Which has been rewritten by my advisor) Ingeus will not be pursuing my application any further and due to the high number of applicants, they can't give me any feedback.

 

You know, I am actually looking forward to my next appointment :smile:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting transcript of oral evidence taken before the work and pensions committee 'the role of JCP in the reformed welfare state' http://freepdfhosting.com/3494568f4b.pdf

 

Some edited highlights from the UM forum http://unemploymentmovement.com/forum/chat-a-rap/7230-oral-evidence-taken-before-the-work-and-pensions-committee#24991

 

So insiders are admitting that sanction targets do exist they are just called something else, ESA claimants that fall foul of mandatory revision who try to claim JSA will inevitably 'fall through the cracks' because they cannot comply with conditionality, and JCP actively 'frustrate' people off benefits.

 

On training, Colin Booth who was there representing the Association of colleges said

 

The DWP and Jobcentre Plus are a barrierto people doing longer skills courses to get them into work. Because they are focused on getting people off the unemployment register, they are very focused on referring people to short interventions to get people into work, but they are actually often a barrier.

This is not the Jobcentre Plus offices, although sometimes they are a bit inconsistent. This is the whole system.

We run a system that means that we frequently get adults who are very motivated, who sign up for courses, and they are then prevented from doing those courses and then we see them again when they are referred and often mandated into training later.

 

We run a system that creates barriers to people participating in longer skills courses and participating on their own terms and with their own motivation, only to refer them under conditionality back into the same system later sometimes.

The document pretty much backs up the experiences of people posting on here, at least the the work and pensions committee have a better idea of how JSA claimants get treated, not that they are likely to change anything.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Osdset, A very revealing set of documents, not just with the points you make but with JPC staff training, holes in the system that make it impossible for some people with medical condition to claim any benefit, the mind set of staff to make sanctions and the lack of disability advisers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole Work Programme set up is a shambles, set up by people with no real life experience of what it is like to be on the dole, and should be scrapped as it has now been proven to be pretty useless (just my opinion).

 

I find that the whole system is grinding to a halt and will probably be privatised if the Conservatives win the next election.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was put forward for a minimum wage admin role working for a company in partnership with Ingeus. My advisor told me I was perfect for the role and would breeze through any interview. It was an'easy win'.

 

Just recieved an email that I after careful consideration of my CV (Which has been rewritten by my advisor) Ingeus will not be pursuing my application any further and due to the high number of applicants, they can't give me any feedback.

 

You know, I am actually looking forward to my next appointment :smile:

 

Would be a nice chance to report Ingeus to the DWP for losing you a possible job by their 'improvement' of your CV which was subsequently rejected. You could argue that had they submitted your untouched version it may have gotten through.

 

As Ingeus always woffle on about 'getting feedback from employers' I think it's only fair that you should pester them for some too - namely; why did your application not go through when you'd been assured it was a breeze?

 

If my experience of Ingeus' CV writing 'skills' are anything to go by, your CV would have ended up being bland, dull and littered with spelling mistakes once one of their advisors had finished with it.

 

Give 'em hell :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole Work Programme set up is a shambles

No, it works perfectly. It moves money from the taxpayer to the private contractors. In other European countries this system is called 'mafia'.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for Poundland"

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole Work Programme set up is a shambles, set up by people with no real life experience of what it is like to be on the dole, and should be scrapped as it has now been proven to be pretty useless (just my opinion).

 

I find that the whole system is grinding to a halt and will probably be privatised if the Conservatives win the next election.

Conversely, if and when Labour return, the likelihood is that they will reintroduce something more insidious than the Work Programme which was conversely worse than the Flexible New Deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If my experience of Ingeus' CV writing 'skills' are anything to go by, your CV would have ended up being bland, dull and littered with spelling mistakes once one of their advisors had finished with it.

 

Give 'em hell :)

 

When Ingeus altered my cv it came back with 22 spelling mistakes i kid you not :roll:

 

It was also very dull to read etc.....i dont use the one they have altered i use the orginal which i am more than happy with :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The last time I was there (last week) there was a whole group of young folks who must have been in their 20's... all lined up for some interview with some serious looking bloke in a suit.

 

Its always the young ones, who get put forward for interviews at ingeus.

As this is where they see a potential bonus if the person gets the job!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Ingeus altered my cv it came back with 22 spelling mistakes i kid you not :roll:

 

It was also very dull to read etc.....i dont use the one they have altered i use the orginal which i am more than happy with :wink:

S got me in for it with m but m just sat at his desk, he claimed its best that I do it myself, his only 'help' was to remove dates, he was useless and he claimed this help was my idea and when I said it wasn't he virtually called me a liar and was too lazy to call s to confirm that I was telling the truth

Link to post
Share on other sites

S got me in for it with m but m just sat at his desk, he claimed its best that I do it myself, his only 'help' was to remove dates, he was useless and he claimed this help was my idea and when I said it wasn't he virtually called me a liar and was too lazy to call s to confirm that I was telling the truth

 

Sounds about right for Ingeus, i have 2 cv's one Ingeus think i use and one i do use....Ingeus are useless at cv's

Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend corrected their spelling and grammar (they kept changing tenses within the same paragraph!) on the re-write of her CV. I have done similar.

 

I really think their CV writing is appalling, I can do a lot better (my re-write got me a short term job and I am in line for another job with the same CV).

 

There are so many older people being left out of the job market now because of the PM's laudable attempt to instill a 'solid work ethic' into the younger generation.

 

The trouble is that a section of that generation have been given to believe that they can walk into a job earning a lot of money just because they have a degree. They don't have the 'life skills' they need to cope on their own, let alone be told what to do by somebody 'lesser' than themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The turnover of staff within the WP is such that they are virtually pulling people off the street willy nilly to take jobs as 'advisors' hence the deplorable standards. Anyone with any training within the WP industry left long ago and turned the lights off on the way out.

 

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

 

Being poor is like being a Pelican. No matter where you look, all you see is a large bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The turnover of staff within the WP is such that they are virtually pulling people off the street willy nilly to take jobs as 'advisors' hence the deplorable standards. Anyone with any training within the WP industry left long ago and turned the lights off on the way out.

 

Have you ever applied for a job at ingeus? its not as easy as you think.....................As you get a long questionaire to fill in......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they get more bonus for a younger person than an older person?

 

They get more money for "difficult" clients - sick, disabled and so on. I don't think merely being over 50 qualifies a person as "difficult", but I'm not sure.

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

I have finished with Ingeus months ago when I found a job they said I wouldn't need to come to any more appointments even though I then didn't end up taking the job as found out it was only commission based.

 

I have signed back on on new claim and everything since then but I keep receiving constant phone calls from Ingeus departments and texts asking 'Justasking how you are getting on in work'. Every few months the advisor I had calls my phone and I don't answer it, he then emails me and says something like 'Please send me your new number I can't get through to you'. Up till now I have got so fed up of the constant phone calls I just answered and told him I am now self-employed. He then says 'That's fine, we'll speak again in a few weeks'

 

Why do they keep phoning me every few months? I have told them I am not in that job anymore but have gone self-employed thinking that would get rid of them but they still continue to pester me. If it's not phone calls it's emails.

 

Don't really want to change my number, and even if I do they still know my email.

 

Anyone know if an Ingeus advisor can contact you through a personal site like Facebook because he has my email or is that a breach of their policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever applied for a job at ingeus? its not as easy as you think....

Did look at their recruitment site - To search and apply for vacancies, you have to register. Registration takes place when you first apply for a vacancy.... Brain dead F.W.

 

Would I actually want to work there - Not unless there is a significant change in temperature in Hell.

 

I have finished with Ingeus months ago when I found a job they said I wouldn't need to come to any more appointments even though I then didn't end up taking the job as found out it was only commission based.

 

Anyone know if an Ingeus advisor can contact you through a personal site like Facebook because he has my email or is that a breach of their policy?

 

Has 104 weeks passed since your very first appointment with them ?

If not, you are still in their grubby little grasp whilst claiming JSA/ESA. If the 104 week period is past, you can write a cease and desist letter threatening to report them for harassment and breaches of the telecoms regulations.

 

Most work places have a policy on the use of facebook during company time - I don't have access from work (nor do I use it at home). If you do get any attempt at contact via facebook, record it in your diary and at it to the list of harassment.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't really want to change my number, and even if I do they still know my

email

It really cannot be said too often - if you don't want to be hassled and harassed do not provide them with a phone number or e-mail address. New consignees please note!

You are perfectly within your rights to tell them that your preferred and only means of communication is by post. They won't like this but will just have to lump it provided you stick politely to your policy. This also means not telling the JCP this information (it will be passed to the WP on your attachment). Ask the JCP to remove the info from their records if they already have it. They did this for me and I survived 2 years at A4greed without one phone call or e-mail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...