Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • 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.   
  • 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

In lawyer mode


F_DCAs
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5063 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

Apparently the information they collect and how they use it depends on the nature of your business between you and them, however it should be all covered in here?

Privacy Policy - DWP

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, it says that 'We may also give information to certain other organisations. This can be because:

 

- The law (including the Data Protection Act) allows us to, or says we have to.

- A court order states it is necessary, or;

- You have given your permission.

 

My questions are :-

 

1. Where in the DPA does it 'allow them to or says they have to'?

2. Is there anything within an ESA agreement relating to passing on information externally?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure, I'm on the old IB, so would imagine it's the same, I'm guessing that it would be a tongue in cheek comment on a form you either sign, or it will be part of the whole process and you will be deemed to have given your permission.

 

Will have to take a closer look, but to be honest, I wouldn't want to be biting the hand that feeds me so to speak..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, it says that 'We may also give information to certain other organisations. This can be because:

 

- The law (including the Data Protection Act) allows us to, or says we have to.

- A court order states it is necessary, or;

- You have given your permission.

 

My questions are :-

 

1. Where in the DPA does it 'allow them to or says they have to'?

2. Is there anything within an ESA agreement relating to passing on information externally?

 

In answer to question 1, this would be under part IV "exemptions". I would

 

In answer to question 2, you give your agreement and understanding of this in signing the declaration when you claim ESA. (the ESA declaration is quoted below), relevant parts bolded.

 

 

● I declare that the information I have given on

this form is correct and complete as far as I

know and believe and I have included all my

income and savings.

● I understand that if I knowingly give information

that is incorrect or incomplete, I may be liable to

prosecution or other action.

● I understand that I must promptly tell the office

that pays my benefit of anything that may affect

my entitlement to, or the amount of, that benefit.

● I agree that

– the Department for Work and Pensions

– any approved health care professional advising

the Department

– any organisation with which the Department

has a contract for the provision of medical

services

may ask any of the people or organisations

mentioned on this form for any information

which is needed to deal with

– this claim for benefit

– any request for this claim to be looked at again

and that the information may be given to that

approved health care professional or

organisation or to the Department.

● I also understand that the Department may use

the information which it has now or may get in

the future to decide whether I am entitled to

– the benefit I am claiming

– any other benefit I have claimed

– any other benefit I may claim in the future.

● I agree to my doctor, or any doctor treating me,

being informed about the Secretary of State’s

determination on

– limited capability for work.

– limited capability for work related activity, or

– both.

This is my claim for Employment and Support

Allowance.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, yes, agreed, every year the DWP along with JCP accuse me of ben fraud, each and every time I show them that it is their flawed administration system to blame..

Sorry Erika:p I am confident that if you were in charge in my neck of the woods, we wouldn't have any problems..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to apologise - I don't, and have never worked for DWP. Common misconception on the forum.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i claimed ESA I did it all over the phone.

 

I did not have to sign anything,.(this was done in november)

 

I got a 12 page letter,last page stating "Do not sign or return

this customer statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so people ,whats the answer to myself when i did not "SIGN"

 

In my declaration statement, (there is 8 bits/parts),will put down all 8 if

people want to know.

 

but for now, just

1-I agree that my doctor, or any doctor who has been

treating you,being informed about the secretary of states determination

on your "limited capability for work" (thats it,nothing about limited capability for work related activity)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I mean - ESA claims are often done by phone.

 

I'd always assumed that the DWP had an automatic right to outsource information, but I'm not so sure now that that automatic right even exists.

 

And if no permission exists from the subject, then the DWP could potentially be acting unlawfully - especially when an ESA claim has been taken via telephone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi F DCAs. If you deal with a bank, say, on the phone, there are all sorts of disclaimers and rules they read to you regarding their regulator, etc.

 

I think I said earlier that the bank send written confirmation later. Are we saying the DWP don't do this? Could this come under the Information Commissioner or not?

 

Just a thought.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume it is similar to the tax credit renewals, where most people do this by phone and don't sign anything. It's taken as a "verbal signature" (their words, not mine). They read out from a script much the same as the declaration.

 

There are lawful provisions for information to be shared for specific purposes in the SSAA, and the SSFA, and the DPA without the claimant's consent.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine you're buying some flowers to be delivered.

 

You ring the florist and say I'd like these flowers delivered to this address.

 

In order for the flowers to get to where you want them they have to give a 3rd party the delivery address.

 

Whilst you did not give specific instructions or your permission for the delivery folks to have this address. By ordering flowers from the florist who uses a 3rd party to deliver you have accepted that this data exchange will happen in order to fulfil your request.

 

By applying for ESA you have accepted the terms & therefore process of ESA as defined by the people implementing ESA. You have therefore given your consent and are now bound by the terms and conditions of the thing you are applying for.

 

It says on the letter (with the responses to you telephone application) we accept your claim as is and unless there is an error we will process that claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would these provisions be, ErikaPNP? Can you clarify on this?

 

I don't recall ever being read anything like this over the phone.

 

You won't be read that over the phone; the provisions are set in the legislation of SSAA, DPA and SSFA that certain data can be provided to third parties without consent for specific purposes (fraud for example), thus they don't need to read it out over the phone. I've linked to the Statues which contain the provisions so that you have access to the Acts in their entirity. There are thousands of other statutes which will allow data to be shared without consent in specific circumstances, but only for that specific purpose. To find every piece of benefit specific legislation visit my sticky here which will guide you in how to find it. The sticky advises on finding both statues and precedents.

 

What I would assume they would do, is read out would be the declaration - as tax credits do for renewal purposes. I don't know that's what they do when a claim is made; it's merely a thought as this is what other companies do. HMRC, Insurance Companies, banks etc. Antone might be able to confirm or deny this.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now i have just had another look at my (esa customre statement,12 pages,from November-09)

Considering i have medical certificates,dated before i made my esa

claim(phone),and have had medical certificates through out this whole

process,and i have been signed off untill the middle of july,reading through

this 12 page statement,(some bits in it are giving me "cause for concern"

1 EMPLOYMENT-

Employed or self employed on or after the date

from which you are claiming? ----------------- yes (nov09)

 

2 YOUR EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Employment status--------------------------- self employed(nov09)

Is this just a mis understanding,or is the (JCP),think i was working after

the date the claim was made?

 

Also ,Heading--

TAX

Do you have P45?-----currently Employed(nov09)

 

Are they(JCP), saying that i was/am working if they ever refer back to

this statement.(couple of other things also dont add up on statement)

 

Can someone please advise/help,just getting a bit "stressed",or is it

jcp just "stitching" up ,sorry just not sure whats going on?

 

" Thanks":confused: in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking out loud, so to speak. I'm sure that if such a question gets raised, they'll come up with some obscure reason for wriggling out of it - that's the DWP by nature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact if I remember rightly, I did have one occasion where the DWP informed me, sorry, accused me of Ben Fraud, where that they had been informed by JCP that they were giving me more money than I had Informed DWP about.

 

When I questiond JCP as to why they had felt the need to pass on this incorrect info, they flatly refused to accept that they had ever done so, when I then spoke to the DWP about it and informed them that the info they had 'assumed' from nowhere was incorrect, they again reverted to the initial claim that it was what JCP had on their system and informed them of.

 

So I concluded and was in fact told by the DWP and the LA, that they all use the same system, to cross check your claims, a bit like, the DCA's having access to the DVLA data base and that of the Royal Mail's 'Address forwarding' system.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

JCP is a part of DWP (they are the same body) so the computer system they use is the same. Only specific people have access to certain areas though; for example, many staff will not have access and others may have a "view only" facility.

 

LA and DWP all share a system called the "Customer Information System". The information in this system is minimal compared to the information that is available on the claim system.

 

The DWP and LA's have a service agreement for sharing specific information in regard to benefit claims.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thank you for clearing that up Erika, just looking at my correspondence and it does clearly state that JCP is part of the DWP.....

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...