Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • did you submit your directions
    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
  • 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

DLA help


JustJ
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4760 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

Hi and thanks for taking the time to read this.

 

I dont know what to do about my DLA situation anymore. I was awarded low rate mobility and middle rate care which stopped in July 2009. Before it stopped I had a baby. A renewal application form was submitted and I was refused both components. With support we appealed and in March 2010 I was awarded lower rate mobility and no award was granted for the care component. No further evidence was sought in order for them to make this desicion. We appealed this desicion and invited them not to look again at the mobility as this is the rate for my circumstances. Two tribunal dates were set and I attended both only to be told there was insufficient evidence and the tribunals were adjourned. I had a medical at home and could not relate to the doctors findings on any level when I received the report. My doctor was also contacted but did not offer up very much except to say my situation is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

 

Today, 21 months after sending my renawal application I attended yet another tribunal and the desicion this time was in my favour. I have been awarded low rate care component. It has taken all this time for them to determine I am eligible. This much I knew from the start the same with the mobility component. I cant stress enough how much this has all troubled me from the date they first refused me. I have wanted to give up practically every step of the way. Its been so hard not to take everything to heart. I cant bare to think about the reality that is my life nevermind having to spell it out time and time again. I believe I am eligible for middle rate care component - the award I was previously on - if anything my circumstances have become even more difficult since having to care for a small child. I feel cheated and dont believe for one minute my case spells out 'low rate'. I want to tell them to shove their award, I dont want to accept this award - I feel like I'd rather have nothing than agree with them which is effectively what Im doing if I accept.

 

Does anyone know what choice I have? Is the desicion of the tribunal final? If anyone has any information or thoughts I would be very grateful. I dont know if I could possibly handle anymore but I've not come this far to roll over now!

 

Power to the people!

Dig deep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for getting in touch. So its not just another appeal drama....its even more!

 

The panel were clueless, all over the place...they had been advised to question me on a specific time period and without fail every question was either from my previous claim 2005 or within the last year...I couldnt help think to myself why are they asking me about support I had back in 2006 or why are they asking me about things in the past year. It was all over in a flash, 5 questions or so and I didnt have the time to explain anything before they were jumpin on to the next question. I fail to see how my answers could support a claim if the questions were not about the time period.

 

This 'law' business sound complicated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you need to do, is to submit a request to the tribunal for a statement of reasons. Once received you can take it to a Welfare Rights specialist (a free service offered by some local authorities, or CAB or a local advocasy service) and ask them to see if they can find if the tribunal have made errors in law or tribunal procedure. If there are such errors, a welfare rights specialist can assist you in seeking permission to appeal to the upper tier tribunal (the appeal you attended would have been first tier). The upper tier tribunal can revise first tier decisions or can order a new tribunal hearing. Be aware that it can go any way, though. It can result in an increase, a decrease, no alteration of the decision or a complete withdrawal of the award.

 

If they have questioned you on a time period which is irrelevant to your claim then that in itself can be errenous and enough to appeal to the upper tier. The correct time period to assess you is the dates the renewal decision is based on. The cannot go beyond the date of the renewal decision though, so if your condition has deteriorated between then the tribunal date and that further deterioration has resulted in you requiring more care, you would be looking at submitting another renewal to DLA rather than a further tribunal, or both if the renewal decision was incorrect and your condition has deteriorated more since the renewal decision.

  • Confused 1

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

Thank you very much ErikaPNP for responding.

 

I have taken your advice and contacted my welfare rights officer. A meeting has been arranged to organise requesting the statement of reason. Perhaps I will be satisfied with their reasons but if not it is a relief just to know its not the end of the road. Its an absolutely exhausting process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>We appealed this desicion and invited them not to look again at the mobility as this is the rate for my circumstances

 

When appealing they will look at the whole claim regardless of what you requested.

 

If you do appeal to upper tier, and appeal is granted, you could get middle rate care, but you could also lose low rate care & mobility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Life-Goes-On

 

I simply mean I was satisfied with the mobility award granted. The appeal was on the grounds of no care component being awarded. I am aware that they look at everything - they would need to in order to have a fair view of my circumstances. I am also aware that they can stop my award altogether but that is not a concern of mine as I think they would find it very hard to deny my situation or prove I am not eligable. This is exactly what they tried and failed to do hence the importance of pursuing a claim all the way to the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Life-Goes-On

 

I simply mean I was satisfied with the mobility award granted. The appeal was on the grounds of no care component being awarded. I am aware that they look at everything - they would need to in order to have a fair view of my circumstances. I am also aware that they can stop my award altogether but that is not a concern of mine as I think they would find it very hard to deny my situation or prove I am not eligable. This is exactly what they tried and failed to do hence the importance of pursuing a claim all the way to the end.

 

The DWP do not have to prove a thing. At the appeal it is your responsibility to prove on the balance of probabilities that you are entitled to whatever you say you are. If you or your evidence isn't compelling enough they will remove everything. The DWP can sit back and watch and do nothing. They may however object to irrelevant evidence being tendered. The Tribunal will then decide if they agree with that objection.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DWP do not have to prove a thing. At the appeal it is your responsibility to prove on the balance of probabilities that you are entitled to whatever you say you are. If you or your evidence isn't compelling enough they will remove everything. The DWP can sit back and watch and do nothing. They may however object to irrelevant evidence being tendered. The Tribunal will then decide if they agree with that objection.

 

Wrong, the DWP have to state their case in a submission and justify their decision quoting regulations and case law. And it would be good to see the DWP objecting to evidence at the tribunal - I never had a single DWP rep at any tribunal I've attended. Yes, the tribunal decide on a balance of probabilities between both submissions, but poke enough holes in the DWP case and their submission becomes less reliable, and the appelant's case more solid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...