Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • 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.
  • 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

Court Summons - Quick Responce Appreciated


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5396 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

Long story short, unemployed on JSA, asked council for ctax benefit it got messed up. Today i recieved a summons and i have nothing. possessions and a limited amount of money (not enough for the full year)

 

I do have a house mate though who isn't on the council tax bill. Can anyone see any problems with the following idea:

 

I will move out the house. Inform the council who will recalculate the bill reducing it from £1100 to about £300 which i can pay. My house mate will then take over the bill and his right to pay by installments will be intact naturally. I will then move back in veyr quick but not change the bill to my name as i am not required to.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of flaws;

 

1) short term absence does not,in most cases. remove the property from being your 'sole or main residence' and thus no single person discount.

 

2) If your both on the same level of occupancy , eg both equal tenants, then legally you are both responsible and should both be on the bill. You have no choice over who is liable as its set in legislation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your responce. I have consulted the CAB. Fortunately the legislation about my prior place of residance does not have a time limit! I can change it whenever i want so that is all fine.

 

I have however been talking to the council and as both residents are on a seperate tennancy agreement we are not liable for council tax rather our landlord. As a result i have been "moved out" and my landlord (parents) moved in on their systems! The court fees dropped and my outstanding council tax upto today is being sent out. Which is can easiy afford!

 

Guess its lucky, but long story short Council Tax is not acceptable i do not benefit from it and i am sure many people are in the same boat. Life is too short to let people like Local Govnmt / Government **** you over, life should be fun so definately find a loop hole and stand up for yourself :)

 

Thanks for your input.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have however been talking to the council and as both residents are on a seperate tennancy agreement we are not liable for council tax rather our landlord

 

I would be wary of people believing this and not paying their CT, generally tenants are liable for their own CT unless stated otherwise in the tenancy agreement

 

Life is too short to let people like Local Govnmt / Government **** you over, life should be fun

 

**** you over, who do you think is paying for you to stay on the dole and give you your CT benefit and maybe HB as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol interesting responce!

 

If they werent there in the first place i would have more money!

 

I am paying for my job seekers allowance by the amount of money I have paid into the system. Its called Income Based JSA where I draw on my previous contributions.

 

I accept I am not contributing to the government at the moment but then you/they are not the one stuck in a house eatting tesco value / adsa price food to keep you going whilst spending all day searching for a job that is not out there.

 

I have already accepted that in a month or so i will take a cleaners job...hardly an IT Administration role at 30K like my last one, but otherwise i will go insane....

 

As for council tax, i am happy to agree, do not follow that responce, it is my circumstance as living in a home owned by my parents and having a seperate tennant that classes this property differently, if you are a usual tennant then you have to pay it yourself.

 

I have now paid up all the outstanding and will continue to pay the bills for my landlords (parents) with the hard earned cash i made before i went on INCOME BASED JSA.

 

.....i hope you get the point i am not a scrubber....i am just trying to balance everything to get out of a ****ty situation.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appologies for the heated responce. I understand what you mean i just find it very very frustrating that i worked my arse off to get into a good position, never claimed a penny, never sought a thing, paid my taxes like the rest.

 

The minute i struggle to juggle everything i get slapped with a court summons for a liability order and costs of £85

 

it costs the council £3 i pay £82 to them!

 

I dont want to be unemployeed and god knows i'm trying to sort it! I am embarrased to be on benefits but i have no choice. I just hate the kick them when there down approach by the council.

 

Incase you wondered i was summoned becuase 1 payment was missed. I had been struggling to meet the payments recently but always payed within a week or so. Due to not paying on the first of each month they decided to take away my right to pay by installments when i fell just over a month behind....it clashed with my allowance and house mates pay day....its hardily like i was trying to avoid it.

 

I attempted to pay myself up to date to have the installments reinstated but was informed the full amount was due so stopped everything until i knew were i stood.

 

hence ****ed over!

 

I do not claim HB or CTB. I did attempt to claim CTB but the application was messed up and am still sorting the one out but if i hear back from 2 interviews then hopefully i won't need to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, perhaps I had a bad day too! If you have a look at the threads I've posted you will see the absolute debacle I had over my CT which led me being taking to court after a payment plan was set up!

 

Its called Income Based JSA where I draw on my previous contributions.

 

 

Sssshhhh, thats the one where you havent paid enough contributions and its based on your income! I presume you've been unemployed for over 6 months and have moved from Contribution Based to Income Based as you do, some bugger on this board will pick that up! :D

 

Good luck on hearing from your interviews!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...