Jump to content

mfpa

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    333
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

10 Good

1 Follower

  1. No, just the area. But in a "small town" it is not hard to find somebody, especially somebody who upsets a lot of people. Interesting idea, I never thought of that. I wouldn't be holding my breath for a useful response, but it is a small investment of time and money. They have, in lots of ways. Yes, it's difficult to justify the expenditure and effort in the face of uncertain return. They have a job and a car, and always seem to be splashing the cash when out in town. But they are also the sort to not comply just to be awkward. I would need an audit trail showing I had asked them to pay before bringing a claim, anyway. I wondered whether it is better coming from me.my wife, or whether local solicitor's free half-hour sessions still include a letter.
  2. 3 month judicial review period? I read about police cautions from several sources, and none of them mentioned such a thing. Maybe £120 - £150. Not sure yet about repair/replacement cost. Not a lot in the grand scheme of things, but more than a month's "disposable" income.
  3. Isn't there also an allocation fee or a hearing fee? There are some devious ***s about; you can never be too sure.
  4. We were not asked at all. Police left an answerphone message the following afternoon saying how they had proceded in the morning after interviewing the attacker. That is an option I am considering. It is the frame, not the lenses that got broken.
  5. How? I don't suppose the police would supply a copy: they won't even give you a copy of your own statement.
  6. I wonder what reasonable defence there could be, given that the attacker admitted the assault and breaking the glasses, and accepted a police caution.
  7. Hi. My wife's glasses were ripped off her face and broken, in an unprovoked attack. The police say the attacker admitted it, but has been given a caution. How does my wife go about getting compensation from the attacker so that she can pay for replacement glasses?
  8. What is meant to happen when you report this to HMRC? My wife was working in 2012 for a company that provides cleaning services in hotels. They repeatedly processed payroll for less hours than she worked, and ignored all verbal and written complaints. The complaint to HMRC resulted in an email saying to log it online via the Pay & Work Rights Complaint Form on the Direct Gov website. Logging online resulted in a phone call a few days later asking my wife for further information, then nothing since.
  9. Various letters back and forth last year, with Nationwide steadfastly refusing to budge from their pretence that my wife owes them money. (One of their letters even states that a basic bank account is not a facility Nationwide offers - they did not reply when I wrote back pointing out that several such accounts are advertised on their website and their "Preliminary Results Announcement for the year ended 4 April 2011" proclaims: "we also offer a basic bank account to our customers, supporting the Government’s agenda on financial inclusion; during the year we opened 89,000 such accounts." ) We heard nothing for 4 months, then a couple of weeks ago a letter from Nationwide saying "management of your account will now be carried out on our behalf by Frederickson International Limited." Sent Nationwide a reply reminding them the account is in dispute and my wife does not owe them any money. First letter from Frederickson International Ltd came the next day: a demand for payment with a threat of "further action." Replied to that saying I acknowledge no debt, the account is in dispute, and stop harassing me about a non-existent debt. Frederickson International followed up with a Letter Before Action, giving my wife 7 days to pay up or they say they will take immediate legal action and seek to add £30 court fees and £50 solicitor costs to the "debt." Replied again that the account is in dispute and acknowledge no debt, also pointing out that Nationwide are in breach of contract and of statutory duty. Any ideas about this Frederickson outfit? Is it likely Nationwide have witheld the facts from them, or are they another cowboy outfit? And what is likely to happen next?
  10. Good if that is what you want. But not when the customer requests, and the service provider agrees to provide, a basic account with no overdrawing facilities and no card payment facilities. The situation at the moment is that they have reviewed the circumstances of my wife's account twice and (surprise!) concluded both times they are in the right - without addressing things like their repeated errors, breach of contract, or breach of statutary duty to treat the customer fairly. I have not yet sent an SAR as finances are really tight and the £10 is a significant chunk of our disposable income.
  11. OK, have not written yet, but eventually managed to get through on the phone. (0300 790 6034 is answered almost immediately by a recorded "Thank you for calling TV Licensing, your call may be recorded for training and quality purposes." Then it is immediately transferred, usually to an engaged tone but after a couple of dozen attempts I was connected to a ringing tone which was shortly answered.) The operator said he had visibility of both the summons and the valid licence. He disappeared to "ask advice from the court administrator" several times during the call. After trying to get me to pay all the remaining payments on the licence today, then trying to get me to set up a direct debit, he said we need take no more action, do not need to answer the summons or attend the court, and will be sent a letter confirming this sometime around the date of the court hearing. He was not able to give me any reference that I could quote to the court. I also asked if it was a mistake that the summons was to a magistrates court tens of miles away in a different local authority area rather than to the local one; apparently that was deliberate as they aggregate cases from several areas together into one court.
  12. My wife received a court summons for TV licence today. She signed a statement on the doorstep in September, admitting to watching TV programmes without a licence. TVLicensing then sent a letter (see image) saying she would avoid prosecution if she immediately bought a licence, by which time we had already got a licence on the cash payment card scheme for £5.60 per week. We are still paying this, although tight finances mean the payments are on occasion 2 or 3 weeks in arrears then caught up by making a multiple payment. The licence has not been cancelled because of the erratic payments; the payment card account page shows the licence as valid, with an expiry date in the future and payments up to date. As I see it, we have complied with what they said was required to avoid prosecution; they have renegued and brought the case anyway. My thought is to write and respectfully point this out and request they drop the matter from the court process. Any thoughts or suggestions?
  13. Did you end up going to court, or did they rescind the summons after you wrote to them?
×
×
  • Create New...