Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. 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. Can a PPC (claimant) 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.   
    • 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.
  • 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

Jobseekers allowance and money earned from Ebay


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5697 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 am about to change my claim from Incapacity Bennefit to jobseekers aloowance because my injury has healed and I am now fit for work.

In the past I have made a little bit of cash buying and selling things on ebay.

When I make my new claim will they ask to see bank statmements?

If they do, will they be concerned about the money I've had coming in from Ebay? I know I can legaly earn £20 per week and still get my bennefit but I have sometimes had more coming in (although very little is actualy profit becasue I've had to lay out to buy the items in the first place).

Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will depend on which type of Jobseekers Allowance you claim, contribution based JSA is a personal allowance for you and it is based on the contributions you paid in the last three years (if you have claimed incapacity for this period it may link)

 

Income based JSA is means tested, this means you and your partner (if you have one) are part of the assessment. If you have any income you must declare it, however they will only want to see your bank statements if you declare savings/capital in excess of £5500.00 as the amount of benefit you are entitled to is affected from £6000.00 onwards.

 

If you have an income each week, they do not disregard any of it, it will be taken into consideration pound for pound unless it is part time earnings or voluntary maintenance (they would disregard a small portion of this income based on your personal circumstances). You can continue to sign on even if your earnings exceed JSA but you would not rec any money.

 

Hope that helps

Edited by MONX
spelling

Advice given is my opinion only, I am not a legal or financial expert (far from it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also remember that whilst on Incapacity benefit you should have declared any work that you were doing as, except in very limited circumstances, you are not allowed to work at all whilst on Incapacity.

 

Mentioning Ebay earnings now might have very serious repercussions if you didn't tell them before. I'm not sure how you can get around this, because obviously you do have to tell the benefits people of any earnings, but hopefully someone else will have some ideas.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I see. I didn't consider that a bit of ebay trading would be considered as work, and I thought I was allowed to earn £20 per week (profit) before they deducted anything. If you average out all my money I have never earned more than £20 per week profit.

I only ever spent about 2-3 hours per week on ebay so I guess that would be considered part time.

Edited by bigcarpman
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can confirm that if you had received Income Support you would be allowed to earn £20 per week but I don't know about Incapacity Benefit.

 

What came as a shock to me when a friend claiming jsa wanted to work just a few hours a week (less than 10) was told he could only earn £5.00 before it had an affect on his claim. I didn't believe it and he checked with our neighbourhood office who confirmed this is so.

 

They may well want to see new statements ( I don't know for certain) but if there has been no ebay activity this might be advantageous to you.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I understand. I have a partner and am making a joint claim for both of us. Does that push the amount I'm allowed to earn up (does it double to £40)? If so I might do a bit more on ebay, I'm really strugling to survive on the benefit money and at the moment havn't seen any jobs I'm likely to get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is what money you got from ebay classed as "earnings" if you were selling off a few of your personal possessions? ;);)

 

I sold a a Nintendo DS just before xmas last year (when they were all sold out in the shops). The winning bidder paid £150 for it (£70 profit on what I had paid). I needed 2 for my kids for christmas and somehow ended up with 3. I had paid for it so it was mine to sell, so could the profit really be classed as earnings?

 

We are on benefits and I can't remember being asked for bank statements to claim any benefit other than council tax and housing benefit. I assume you are already in receipt of these benefits, so you bank statements probably wont be an issue.

 

Regarding what you are allowed to earn when on JSA, I would ring and ask them. We are a family with 2 kids and I applied for a job recently and was told any wages over £20 would be deducted from our benefit. There are different amounts for different circumstances.

:razz:ALWAYS REMEMBER, IF YOU GOT YOURSELF INTO YOUR SITUATION, YOU ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF GETTING YOURSELF OUT OF IT

WITHOUT THE HELP OF THE DCA's!!!!!!!!!!!

 

IF YOU NEED HELP WITH UPLOADING YOUR IMAGES THROUGH PHOTOBUCKET CLICK HERE

IF I HAVE HELPED YOU OR MADE YOU SMILE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CLICK MY STAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly,

 

As I said earlier it does depend on a lot of things, firstly which benefit you claim and also you have to consider the time you are spending trading on ebay. To claim Jobseekers Allowance (both of them) you have to be available, capable and actively seeking work for at least 40hrs per week. If for argument sake are trading for 20hrs per week this will have an affect on your available hours.

 

You could also keep quiet about your trading and just do it on an evening therefore you do not affect your availability, however on the capital/savings (income based JSA) side of things you have to tread very carefully, you may not feel your trading constitutes a lot of money but if the profit part of the amount exceeds £5, you are in fact committing fraud if you do not declare it.

 

Having said that, Huggys boss I think if it is something you do vary rarely or once in a blue moon I wouldnt worry too much about it.

Advice given is my opinion only, I am not a legal or financial expert (far from it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incapacity benefit isn't directly means tested, so you are allowed private sources of income. The only restriction is on work. I'm not sure whether selling on ebay counts as work, but it presumably depends on the circumstances: trading full time would; selling a few possessions wouldn't.

 

If your selling does count as work, it is permitted work if either:

 

1) You made no more than £20 a week, or

2) You made no more than £88.50 a week and worked for less than 16 hours a week.

 

So I reckon you'll be ok unless you were trading full time.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bigcarpman

 

If your going to be upfront with them from now on.

Open a new bank account and Paypal account, close down any banks and Ebay sites that you have previously been selling on, and start afreash.

I know this may seem a lot to do, but this is just a helpful warning.

If you don't they can go back to every transaction you have made on ebay.

 

This is just a bit of helpful advice, you don't need to take it.

 

Gaz

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...