Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.View the full article
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2369 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 had my ESA stopped which is now pending an appeal, I have had to do a joint claim to claim UC, what a nightmare this has been.

 

My original claim was from the the 23rd June and they have in therefore paid me four weeks instead of five, 23/06/17 - 22/07/17 that will be paid on 29/07/17. so in other words they are paying me four weeks but not paying me until the 5th week but not paying for the 5th week.

 

As I have come straight over from ESA the seven day waiting period and as I understand it cannot be used by the DWP so why has a week been deducted and why if my claim started on the 23/06/17 and payable on 22/07/17 not reaching my account until a week later?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated, and as per norm why do they make the simple things not so simple,.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To put this in simple terms as it can be confusing.

Your claim is based on your cirs between set dates eg 23/6-22/7 you will then get paid based on what you tell them. Its payable the following week as the computer needs to send the info to the banking then it get checked then paid.

This is the same every month always based on circs the 23rd-22nd before payment.

You will always get paid the same date each month eg the 29th unless its a weekend or bank holiday.

 

Uc is paid monthly like a job will be. You tdsa get paid 5 weeks wages so why 5 weeks benefits.

 

I am not on uc but a friend is and l help him with

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I made the mistake of stating in my application for UC that there were 3 people on the tenancy agreement, when in fact it is two, me and my wife.

 

My Council have and on considering my application for housing benefit have indicated that the award for housing giving by UC is £202 less than should have been awarded.

 

I have contacted the UC and they have indicated that the underpayment is probably due to the fact that I incorrectly stated there were 3 people on tenancy agreement as opposed to two, and a genuine mistake, which would not have been made if I actually spoke to a human as opposed to doing every via a computer.

 

Will or is a backpayment due?, I have updated the correct information via the internet and through my journal now, as always any help would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH l don't know. I know that you can get back dated other things, eg ESA support group, but that's it. In all fairness l would leave a journal entry asking for it and explain why. Say you don't understand the form the mistake won't have been made if you had been able to have the help of someone. If they reje t it then go to MR

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received a letter this morning about being evicted because I am in rent errors that have calculated since being dumped of ESA support group and having to apply for UC.

 

My landlord highlighted that the information that UC had sent them was incorrect and as a result the amount in rent awarded and what would be included in payments was some £200 a month short for the allowance for housing.

 

Since I have pointed this out any entitlement to backdated payment in order for me to pay went has been held up, and in my opinion, quite deliberately as the UC and my landlord cannot communicate an initial mistake made not by me, but them, giving the number of bedrooms in property, which is 3, but their information stated there was 5 bedrooms which is wrong and they are now aware of this.

 

Seems to me that they are using their miscommunication of facts as a means of delaying any underpayment being met and until my landlord and UC work out and agree to how many bedrooms I have I am falling behind in rent as I cannot afford to pay until the correct amount is awarded.

 

Its so straight forward but the cynic in me is telling me that the delay and whilst my rent increases and giving the time is being done deliberately which if true, and I would not in the slightest be surprised if this were to be the case, is another example of how these puppets treat Claimants with complete contempt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UC have stated that 14% reduction because we only use 2 bedrooms in three bedroom property, I assume this is for bedroom tax?

 

I have just been awarded a discrepancy payment over the same period based on financial hardship by Landlord, would this have any effect on what we may be entitled too for housing benefit paid via UC.

 

And is there any truth in the fact that UC would have to pay a months rent in advance, as always advice would beappreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, as the rules and regulations are complicated in respect of UC, my doctor gave me a fresh certificate to say that I was unfit to work and signed me off for three months, early July.

 

I have filled out and sent back work capability questionnaire.

 

Am I or will I be entitled to any extra money or should have I been giving any extra benefit for being classed as untit for work?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in the support group before they stopped my ESA on the grounds that I failed to turn up for a medical assessment which is now subject to an appeal.

 

In theory my ESA was not stopped because of any assessment but because I did not attend an assessment, and the reason for that, DWP never gave notification, had they and like all the others before, I would have attended.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I am currently on UC I have filled out the fit for work form and have been signed off by my doctor who says I am unfit for work for a further three months, this after a previous certificate was provided confirming I was unfit to work for the previous three months.

 

I was previously in receipt of ESA and in the support group and in receipt of DLA, under the UC rules does a claimant or is a claimant entitled to any benefits if deemed unfit to work as opposed to not being able to find employment.

 

Any help would as always, be appreciated. SF

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Received letter this morning that I need to attend a medical assessment.

 

Giving that I have just been awarded PIP on appeal, and the Tribunal have evidently stated that I am unfit to work until 2019, do I need to attend?

 

Any advice would as always be appreciated.

 

SF

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received letter this morning that I need to attend a medical assessment.

 

Giving that I have just been awarded PIP on appeal, and the Tribunal have evidently stated that I am unfit to work until 2019, do I need to attend?

 

Any advice would as always be appreciated.

 

SF

 

They are two different benefits. You receive ESA because you're unfit to work. You receive PIP because you have a health condition which means you have care and /or mobility needs. Whilst some of the criteria does overlap, there are some differences.

 

ESA and UC are slightly different - with ESA, you just get your ESA every 2 weeks. with UC, you get your element what was ESA (or whatever group they place you in) every month. If applicable, you'd also get your housing element paid with your UC too. Whereas under ESA, you either had it paid to your landlord or it was paid separately to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to attend an medical assessment in regards to my claim for UC.

 

Giving it has taking me a year to establish the last assessment that I had trying to claim PIP was denied and predominately on a fabricated medical report, which seems to working and relied upon by the DWP, I want to be able to record this upcoming assessment.

 

What rights, if any does a Claimant have? because giving that we are now living in an age where simple technology could remove any doubts in what actually does happen at these assessments, it would appear that such denial to some proof as with a lot of things associated with the DWP, are ancient, out of touch and and motivated in gagging claimants.

 

I am going to write to my useless MP who has disappeared since I have giving him facts and documents to show how the DWP are treating people and going to demand my next medical assessment is recorded by my wife.

 

It would be in the interest of the public, for this recording to be made, in the likely event that the assessor lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Spitfire

 

When you say your wife recording the assessment, how are you planning to do that?

Hi flofilee

With a mobile phone..

 

Or by any other means that say for argument sake, would be admissible in law, civil or criminal.

 

If I believe fraud is going to be committed and it is in the public interest, or in the interest of public justice, surely I can exercise that right, don't know, but it seems ancient and unequal that medical evidence being gathered could be deemed, mere hearsay.

 

I want to ask the Assessor some questions, and be able to rely on their answers if needs be, recording them removes any doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no covert recording would be admissible in law, civil or criminal

you do realise that if you use the search cag box of the top red tool bar

there are literally 1000's of threads on it

that invoke the 'self help' ethos of CAG that you appear sometime to forget.

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

UC is paid 1 month in arrears, just like most salaries

Attend the Medical Assessment, you have experience of consequences if you fail to attend.

Several MPs and the Press may be interested in your story, if you contact them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi flofilee

With a mobile phone..

 

Or by any other means that say for argument sake, would be admissible in law, civil or criminal.

 

If I believe fraud is going to be committed and it is in the public interest, or in the interest of public justice, surely I can exercise that right, don't know, but it seems ancient and unequal that medical evidence being gathered could be deemed, mere hearsay.

 

I want to ask the Assessor some questions, and be able to rely on their answers if needs be, recording them removes any doubt.

 

Er No... It doesnt work like that...

If you start recording without consent of the DWP workers etc whoever they maybe then it could delay it further.

Bad idea...

 

As DX says... Go have a read... :)

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...