Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
  • 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

Claiming JSA for me and my EU partner


Trigg
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3706 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

Hello everyone

 

I lost my job soon after Christmas and now have had to claim JSA. Problem is i have a partner living with me since September 2013 who is from Romania. I'm British. So far I've avoided claiming as a couple because i thought it would be a waste of time and be automatically rejected anyway. Problem is, I'm now really starting to struggle supporting the 2 of us on single persons JSA and was wondering if i could claim as a couple until i find work again.

 

I've heard the habitual residence test is tested on the claimant, which would be me and not my partner?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How long has your partner lived in the UK? Have you lived abroad for any period recently (say, within the last year or so)? And has your partner worked in the UK since he or she arrived?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romanian jobseekers have full EU rights since 1st January 2014 so she can claim JSA even if she never worked in the UK.

The only thing is, you both have to prove that you are habitually resident in the UK which means been living here for three months prior to the date of the JSA claim. Bank statements, utility bills, tenancy agreement, evidence of GP / dentist appointments, library / gym registration and whatever you can come up with to prove residency. EU Jobseeker migrant is not eligible for ESA. I am EU migrant on JSA so as long as she can satisfy the jobseeking requirements set by the JCP, she will get her money. Even British citizens may fail the HRT and in theory everyone has to do it, not just EU migrants. Seen online article about British guy failing HRT and not getting JSA right after moving back to UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever is the claimant [both of you will be??] trust me that Romanian citizen will have to sit the HRT because the legislation was rushed through parliament because of Romania & Bulgaria becoming full EU rights member states on 1st Jan 2014. The new law says no one is habitually resident during the first 3 months of stay in the UK.

 

Prior to 01/01/2014 there was no official time limit to define habitual residency but a rough one month limit, proven intention to remain in the UK. To prevent this alleged benefit tourism, they came up with the three month requirement.

 

Last year government thought that there would be mass migration from Romania and Bulgaria now that they have full EU rights. Half of Poland and Eastern Europe moved to the UK since we joined the EU and your government really does not want to give benefits to migrants. Fact is, they have to, by EU law so if she manages to write a detailed list of what she has been doing to find work [agencies, websites] and produces satisfactory evidence for the three month stay: will get JSA.

 

"Settled intention to remain" is important to prove so UK long-term partner is a good enough proof for one thing. Irrelevant how long she has been in the UK [prior to the past 3 months] as it will not be checked. However, the fact that she has worked in the UK before does help so P45, name of references [eg if she was an au-pair and no P45].

 

Starting voluntary work and getting a statement to support JSA claim is a good idea. It will get her recent UK work experience and a reference and JCP will force most claimants to do "voluntary" work sooner or later so it might as well be of your own choice. You can do up to 17 hours of voluntary work per week as long as you let JCP know ASAP by filling in their Volwork form and provide a statement from the employer about hours and the fact that no wages paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again :-)

 

Thank you for your quick and informative replies. No i have never lived in another country and currently get single persons JSA. My partner moved over here to live with me in July of last year but i have never claimed for her. Were both unemployed at the moment but sending CV's out everyday and trying our best to get working. I have found myself having to go to a food bank last week as the money just isn't stretching enough as i have to take my girlfriend for job interviews and been paying full subscriptions for her out of my JSA.

 

She has been registered with the doctor ever since she arrived and still have all the correspondence letters, Doctors were appointments sent to my phone by text. She is also registered with the free dental hospital and had emergency treatment last year. Maybe i could go to our doctors and they could provide a list of her appointments that were attended?

 

My other concern is that i have been claiming as a single person since December, and now have to tell them that i have been living with someone since July. I just never claimed for her because of all what was on the news about restrictions of benefits to Romanians

 

Thanks again for your help :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's another thing to be careful about: you've been living with a partner and not declaring it so now you need to declare change of circumstances [living with a partner] and hence a joint claim.

 

So what are the living arrangements? Because from the address she gives for the 3 months prior to start of claim will be your address and not declaring living with a partner for 3 months will / may be taken as benefit fraud and you may have to pay back your JSA.

 

A partner and a female friend are two different things. Is it she moved in as a favour and during her stay you recently started to have a relationship? Going out for a couple of weeks does not make you partners so you are declaring it in good time and hence the change?

 

Changes of circumstances have to be declared immediately so regardless of her nationality and her rights to UK benefits- is it on your claim that you are living with a partner because it should be as your claim date is Jan 2014 and she moved in prior to that. "As a friend", is it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The claimant's partner's name and income has to be on the JSA claim so that DWP can calculate if you are eligible. Even if she has no income since July and even if you knew in December 2014 that she would not be eligible back then, you were supposed to name her in your claim as a partner and state her income. So now by declaring that she has been living with you for the past 3 months, you are getting yourself into trouble.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beatrice

 

Yes i should have claimed in January since i lost my job. I never thought i could claim for her and have lost out financially living just on single persons JSA when i could have claimed as a couple all this time :sad: Silly me, i just never knew i could claim for her with what was said in the media regarding Romanians/Bulgarians

 

Have just passed an job assessment recently so hopefully be starting work soon

 

Thanks for all your advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do hope you get that job. Naming a partner in your claim is not the same as claiming for her so as far as an ignorant EU migrant can see, partner should have been named in your claim in December regardless of her rights to UK benefits.

 

I was staying at a friend's as a favour and we started to have a relationship yet I did not regard him as a partner as we were not financially connected, we did not go out together and I intended to move out ASAP, finances allowing.

 

If you do a joint claim , it may be important if it is a studio flat where it is not possible to sleep in separate rooms, or a one-bed with a sitting room. DWP may come down on you as a tonne of bricks if she has to sit an HRT and for the past three months she puts down your address as hers and says you have been living together [as boyfriend and girlfriend] since last July.

 

You need to hear other opinions besides mine. Don't know much about claiming apart from being on JSA and HB for the past 3 years. EU migrants fill in the same claim forms as British citizens. Every time I claimed I was single so partner was not named in my claim.

 

She will have to close her claim if she goes abroad even for one day as you supposed to tell JCP. Fails to sign fortnightly, they close anyone's claim soon after unless you drop a JSA28 sickness form at JCP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beatrice

 

Yes i should have claimed in January since i lost my job. I never thought i could claim for her and have lost out financially living just on single persons JSA when i could have claimed as a couple all this time :sad: Silly me, i just never knew i could claim for her with what was said in the media regarding Romanians/Bulgarians

 

Have just passed an job assessment recently so hopefully be starting work soon

 

Thanks for all your advice.

 

As Beatrice says, she really should have been named as your partner even if she was not entitled to UK benefits. Back when I made a claim, my wife was named as my partner even though she is a Canadian citizen and wasn't able to claim - I just got paid the single rate.

 

Still, what's done is done and this issue (not informing them about her) has not resulted in your being paid more money than you were entitled to, so it probably won't be too much of a problem. Not wanting to be a scold, but don't do this again - you must declare all of your circumstances when you claim.

 

Since she's a habitually resident EU citizen claiming a benefit for those who are "economically active" (in other words, not too sick to work) you should be entitled to be paid at the couple rate.

 

As you have a current claim, you would need to report a change of circumstances on form JSA3, available from your Jobcentre, and supply all of her information. The claim will probably be referred for a Habitual Residence Test, of course, but I believe in principle she should be entitled.

 

Oh, and hope you get the job :-)

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot to both of you. I'm going just to face the music and make that change of circumstances ASAP. I will just be very honest and upfront about everything to them and hope they show leniency. It's not that i have taken any more than i would been entitled anyway so i never thought of it as benefit fraud as never gained anything financially. I just wish i had been honest from the start and feel a bit silly now :sad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not mean to sound harsh, just worried that now declaring as living together since last July may cause problems.

She is entitled, 100%: the JSA coming into my account proves that EU migrants are entitled to JSA if habitually resident. Meaning "living here" as opposed to being on a holiday, and for at least 3 months.

 

OP not naming his Romanian partner in his claim starting in December 2014 and now having to prove address of girlfriend for the past 3months to show her eligibility to UK JSA clashes a bit. Yes, it would definitely cause problems if girlfriend was working full time / over 24 hours back in December or even now as her income would have needed to be taken into account to see if OP gets the weekly £72 JSA.

 

I would not want to give DWP any grounds to suspend my current claim until it is decided if any overpayments were made. So there is no harm in not saying in HRT "living together as partners" since July 2013, unless it is specifically asked. They ask your current status and not your status back in July.

 

I'm just being extra cautious because food banks means claimant can not afford JSA suspension. Suspensions destroy your nerves even if you do not have to resort to food banks so that job would be the best solution. Evading JSA sanctions is tough for native speakers not to mention migrants and it is shocking that they take away British jobseekers' benefits for next to nothing if not unfairly, like saying: you have no evidence of job search because it is not printed out. I am no benefit tourist because I was working for 5 years before claiming and with this sanction regime benefit tourism is impossible as honest UK claimants fall like flies so what chance do migrants with poor / intermediate English have?

 

You need knowledge of UK JSA legislation and JCP internal policy as well as advanced English to avoid sanctions which even British people can't so benefit tourism is a term coined by the government to blame it all on migrants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yes, "Benefit Tourism" is indeed a nonsense idea. Apart from anything else, there are other EU countries with far more generous benefits than we have. It's not like people are queuing up at Dover to receive their £72 per week and HB for a dismal bedsit in Gillingham. Hold me back, please!

 

Still, I'm trying to keep away from politics here. OP, the only serious complication would be if your partner was working while you claimed JSA. If not, I think this will be a slap on the wrist, if anything. I do agree with Beatrice that there is no need to draw attention to the fact that she's been living with you for a while now, but if specifically asked (on a form or by an adviser) then please don't lie about it.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked it and it is "drop like flies", not fall like flies. The word that saved me is "uncorroborated evidence", quoting JCP policy about what evidence advisers have to accept to put your money through. Stood up for myself at last signing saying DWP policy says they have to accept uncorroborated evidence which is unproven evidence, like list of job search in signing on booklet or even oral evidence. The woman claimed she can not see my job search because I did not allow access to my Universal Jobmatch account. Good old job search booklet was in front of her but would not open it to see my list.

 

So you need to quote law and policy to stand up for yourself because she was saying we refer it to a decision maker. I said DWP policy states she has to accept uncorroborated evidence and has to provide a printer for me to print. What has the world come to that I am using words I vaguely understand to avoid sanctions. See it from posts up here that posters are British [as you spot mistakes migrants make in posts] and appaling that they got sanctioned unfairly for not being a book worm and not being able to quote internal policy about actively seeking work and being available for work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The key point, Beatrice, as it was explained to me in ESA training, was that a claimant has a right to be believed. That's important - unless what you say is "inherently improbable" ("my jobsearch diary was eaten by a tiger") or contradicts something you've already said, then JCP staff should not ask you to corroborate your statements.

 

This issue actually came up for me when a claimant missed four successive WCAs, and on each occasion he told us he was attending his father's funeral. That was a mess.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...