Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

Should Ergophobia (Fear of Work) be recognised as a valid medical condition


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3283 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 considering setting up an E-petition when its back after the elections calling upon the government to recognise Ergophobia or fear of working as a recognised medical condition.

 

I am interested to know of any experiences from people who may have this condition or know someone who has and gauge peoples perception of how they view people who suffer from this condition.

 

Unfortunately the mental health community does not recognize work aversion / fear of work as an illness or disease and therefore no medically recognized treatments exist.

 

Can you imagine the hell sufferers of this condition go through each day in order to survive, not only do they have to cope with limited finances, hounded by the DWP and stigmatised as work shy and lazy, there is no help available to them should they mention their illness to the wrong person and could find themselves in severe financial difficulties.

 

The quicker this illness is recognised, the faster these people will get treatment.

Edited by trebormoinet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly I have been unable to get Dumasphobia recognised as well so I fear you may be on a hiding to nothing

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly I have been unable to get Dumasphobia recognised as well so I fear you may be on a hiding to nothing

 

I am sorry to hear of your troubles, if you have an e petition already set up for this condition I would be happy to sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly I have been unable to get Dumasphobia recognised

 

I fear you are being a little unkind....:razz:

 

trebormoinet: To some extent, I'm currently going through a patch of "really can't be a**ed to go in to work". More through general despondency and lack of enthusiasm rather than a fear of labour.

 

Ergophobia turns up in a few medical resources, so it is at least a defined condition. I wish you luck in getting it officially recognised by the DWP.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumasphobia is far more an important issue to understand esp on forums

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to give the OP one iota of credability, could you imagine if you really had this problem.

 

I ask, not in jest, as my eldest son has an abject fear of cooked mushrooms. So although the OP may be taking the Micheal, if you really had a fear of working, you would be knackered! Esp with the Tories in power.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jmy eldest son has an abject fear of cooked mushrooms.

 

Indeed, to some it might seem a joke but if your a sufferer then it is an entirely different matter.

 

I have a fear of heights , I have a restriction on my job seekers agreement that excuses me from applying for jobs that involve working from heights.

 

I did not have to provide any medical evidence to back up my claim, I have not been assessed by anyone in the medical profession, yet I was simply believed with no fuss whatsoever and the restriction was added.

 

I also have a restriction for jobs that require colour vision, I no it is a physical condition but after I was asked apply for a job wiring electrical looms, I told them I am totally colour blind again no fuss, no test the restriction was added.

 

Is it discrimination to accept some physical and mental issues without question, yet others have to go through a long painful process, I think I am straying, but if you son ever had the misfortune to to be unemployed and explained their fear and requested restrictions to not work in any industry where they might come across a cooked mushroom would they be as amicable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And how would you survive without income from working/

 

Fear of heights I have, but I went Mountain climbing to challenge myself.

 

Not all work involves working from height and I think it is great you faced your fears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i recall an actual case where someone claimed a fear of the buzz of electricity/noise, or something like that. they were then housed in the country in the sticks! not bad, most have to pay for a house in the countryside!

Link to post
Share on other sites

bureaphobia?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then surely it'd come under IDS's 'you must get treatment to claim' category of illnesses.

Then sufferers can get help and treatment if it is recognised, I think depression is sometimes mistakenly diagnosed as the cause rather than a symptom of this condition until that changes many people will be given inappropriate treatment and the issue will never will be resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if someone has depression then its not a fear of work, its depression? ie depression being the cause of why someone may not be willing to/up for work. not a symptom. help the depression, then the desire to work shld follow. unless it is 'lazyitis'. :)

are you suffering from depression?

Link to post
Share on other sites

help the depression, then the desire to work will follow. unless it is 'lazyitis'. :)

 

Exactly, unless it is "lazyitis" as you call it, then the problem is never addressed.

 

The other end of the spectrum of this condition is workaholic which is a recognised condition has treatment available and does not carry the same social stigma attached as with ergophobia which is less likely to be reported by sufferers.

 

are you suffering from depression?

I hope not but if you find any evidence I might be please let me know ASAP and thank you for the concern.
Link to post
Share on other sites

not as i call it, as was posted see #12. but it may seem apt :)

 

i wldnt be able to find any evidence, thats for your gp :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's interesting about this is that there are millions of people across the world who live with phobias every day and do 'get on with it'. I'm terrified of heights but know that if I don't face it head on then I'll spend my life wasting opportunities.

 

Likewise those scared of dogs, spiders, birds and people with beards. You can't live a life avoiding things, you can develop strategies and techniques to cope with even the most debilitating of phobias and as someone alluded to earlier, part of that is down to exposure to to learn that not every high bridge is going to collapse, nor every spider bite or even a bearded man do something 'beardy'.

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'get on with it'.

That is a very telling attitude, would that be your advice to someone suffering from depression ?

 

I am hoping it gets recognised as a condition so that people who suffer can get the appropriate treatment, whatever the method and then they will have the chance to "get on with it".

 

It might mean the best form of treatment is supported exposure to the work environment over a period of time BUT if this issue remains hidden, unrecognised, people will not get the right treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is already help for sufferers of ergophobia (drugs, therapy).

 

About 50 years ago, 'ergophobia' was wrote on patients prescriptions.

 

A person genuinely suffering from ergophobia can receive help from their GP.

 

I am guessing that the GP may not use the word 'ergophobia' now, but may use some other term such as 'stress reaction'.

 

I really do not understand the purpose or point of the online petition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trebor, it seems that the purpose of the inverted commas is a bit lost on you.

 

My advice to anyone dealing with an issue that they find overwhelming would be to seek help so that they can continue to live as normal a life as possible.

 

As p3t3r says treatment already exists and provided that the individual seeks help then it's for the clinician to treat the symptoms. In all of my time working in the NHS I have come across people who want to be treated, not labelled.

 

There are already clinical classification codes for almost everything, I'll check for you later this morning exactly what the one is for ergophobia if it's there.

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trebor, it seems that the purpose of the inverted commas is a bit lost on you.

You could be right as grammar was never my strong point, please clarify.

 

In all of my time working in the NHS I have come across people who want to be treated, not labelled.
That is not entirely correct, some people actually find comfort, relief when labelled.

 

"The diagnosis and label made my actions and thoughts make sense. I've actually found comfort in the label. But I do realize not everyone wants to be labelled. "

 

In fact some people respond well to being labelled.

 

"I think it makes me special: I am creative, intelligent, and empathetic. When I look at my bipolar lineage (all the famous writers, artists, actors, and doctors), I feel proud. "

 

There are already clinical classification codes for almost everything, I'll check for you later this morning exactly what the one is for ergophobia if it's there.
Thank you, much appreciated if you can find it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...