Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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
      • 160 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

Jsa Claim When Partners Working


gooseygander75
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4662 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

He will be able to claim for contribution based JSA not matter what his partner is earning, etc.

 

If he does not have enough contributions to get this or is still unemployed after the 6 months entitlement is up then I think if his partner is working less than 24 hours per week he can claim for income based JSA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He will be able to claim for contribution based JSA not matter what his partner is earning, etc.

 

If he does not have enough contributions to get this or is still unemployed after the 6 months entitlement is up then I think if his partner is working less than 24 hours per week he can claim for income based JSA.

 

Yes, he can. Any amount he received would take his partner's wages into account, if he were to claim income-based JSA.

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

  • 1 year later...

Hi all--my partner is claiming single jsa--I work 35hrs a week if I stayed at her place regularly during the week instead of mine would this skewer her claim as benefits might say we were living together as a married couple? What are the rules?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all--my partner is claiming single jsa--I work 35hrs a week if I stayed at her place regularly during the week instead of mine would this skewer her claim as benefits might say we were living together as a married couple? What are the rules?

 

It's hard to say. The issue is whether or not you are "living together as husband and wife" (LTAHAW) and this term is not defined in law. If a decision became necessary (say, if she reports a change to the DWP, or if it is reported for her by an, er, "public spirited" neighbour) then the case would be passed to a Decision Maker to be looked at on an individual basis.

 

Here's a link to a DWP Decision Makers' Guide on the subject. The gist of it is "do you act like a married couple?" For example, do you maintain another residence? Are your finances interlinked - joint bank accounts or loans, perhaps? Would friends and neighbours see you as a couple living together, and do you present yourselves that way?

 

It's only an issue if her claim is for income-based JSA. If she claims the contribution-based benefit, your working hours or income would not be a concern, at least, not until her contributions exhaust and she has to claim JSA(IB).

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 Antone--very good reply--there is a VERY public spirited neighbour nearby. I do have a house where I pay my own bills (Mortgage Utilities Council tax etc ) so does she on her home. Credit cards are additional cardholder--bank a/cs seperate. Mmm thought Partners where meant to act like a married couple these days--whats the difference? views pls. Will have a look at the `Descision Makers`now,sounds like a good read--but scary. Gitanes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Antone--very good reply--there is a VERY public spirited neighbour nearby. I do have a house where I pay my own bills (Mortgage Utilities Council tax etc ) so does she on her home. Credit cards are additional cardholder--bank a/cs seperate. Mmm thought Partners where meant to act like a married couple these days--whats the difference? views pls. Will have a look at the `Descision Makers`now,sounds like a good read--but scary. Gitanes

Hi-------

Have just read the D makers--I would say it answers it all,I would say most couples what be found Guilty. Thanks for posting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

i had worked for 30 years as a senior manager and was made redundant in december . i was on contribution jsa but that came to an end last week, I applied for income based jobseekers and received a letter saying i could not get it because my partner works 23 hours per week ( 2 part time jobs) and earns £ 140 per week from them term time only. i explained i took a mortgage protection insurance whilst working and if i am not on benefits it becomes void ! the job centre plus advisor said that isnt her problem. I asked if there was something in place for helping with mortgages and was told no cos i was not eligible for benefits although i tried to explain that my partner only works term time and anyway how can we pay a mortgage of £725 per month and all the bills and food etc and clothes and bring up 2 kids on £140 per week term time. i was gobsmacked when the advisor said ' well maybe that will be another good repossesion property to bid for ' and then put the phone down on me ! has anyone got any advise how i can get help with my mortgage or have i just got to accept a probable repossesion cos the stress of this is making us really ill now

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah we get £10 per week tax credits and the child benefit is what i says to feed the kids , the point im making is howcome people get all their rent paid when unemployed and people get help with their mortgages but i and my partner have always worked since leaving school and this is the first time we have ever needed help from anyone and there doesnt seem to be any , oh and we have enough stress as it is with my son just getting over a tumour

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are living on your wifes income then speak to tax credits as you may be entitled to more.

 

Also, make an appt with cab benefits advisor.

"In this situation, you know what you have to do? Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming." Dory - Finding Nemo.:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...