Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I am a local authority tenant and was in a 3 bed house. At the end of last year, my last child moved out and so did my spouse as we are now going through a divorce which meant that I was in the house alone and decided that I needed to downsize not only for myself but to offer the property to a family that needed it. I registered on the local authority housing bidding site as i was asked to do and I was accepted and given a priority banding as I was downsizing and they were desperate for my house. I have been extremely lucky and after about 6 weeks was accepted for a new build from a housing association via the housing gateway. I viewed the property 2 weeks ago and had to sign the tenancy last week when they were doing bulk signups for the houses and that is the day I moved. In between viewing and sign up, I contacted my current local authority landlord and asked how I give notice as I had been accepted for a property I had bid on and was moving.  The lady told me how to do it online and then said that I needed to give a full weeks notice which wasnt a problem as I had enough time.  (I was also told a weeks notice was what i would need to give by another staff member about a month ago when I phoned up for another housing related question.  I dont have any of this in writing.) I have now moved, handed back the keys and I am now being told that I need to give 4 weeks notice which I cannot afford. I hav e spoken to the council again explaining that I was told a week and that to be honest, if I knew they were going to charge me 4 weeks I would not have been able to move and would have stayed in the other house.  I thought I was doing the right thing. They said that calls are recorded and they asked me when I called in and was told a week and they would listen to the telephone conversation and if it was correct what I was told, they would see what they could do to reduce the notice period. They have now emailed me back and said that they have listened to the conversation and the lady said 4 weeks notice and I am liable for 4 weeks rent.  Now I may well of misheard her when I thought she said a full weeks notice she may have said 4 weeks notice but I am sure she said a full weeks notice and i was told a week by another member of staff a few weeks ago. I have emailed her back and said that I may of misheard but I would like to listen to the phone recording myself.  As yet they havent responded. I think its unreasonable for them to make me give 4 weeks when I had to sign the new tenancy with little notice or loose the property.  And it was all done through their gateway, and they will have a tenant in there pretty much straight away getting rent from them. I am on a very low income, I am on my own, I have serious medical issues and I am really getting myself stressed out over this. Any advice would be so appreciated.  Can I insist they let me listed to the recording? RH  
    • Susan Crichton is at the Inquiry today. She seems to have trouble remembering a lot of things but seems to find it easier if it's something that shows her in a good light.
    • Send them a letter of claim straightaway. No point hanging around. Given 14 days in the letter of claim and if they haven't paid you by then, issue the claim on day 15. The amount of time is more than adequate for them to get going. Post your draft letter of claim here. A look at. Then log onto the MoneyClaim website and start preparing your claim and post your particulars of claim here for us to have a look at. Don't bluff. No point in it.
    • That's what we thought, but the store manager is inferring that, as the jeweller we used was not a member of the NJA, no one  would give what he said, any credence. The Jeweller we used is in fact, a long established, well respected company, with 2 store and rather than just being a retailer, they craft the most exquisite jewellery inhouse!  I wish my Fiancé would have bought from them rather than H Samuel! Do you think we do need to get another report from and NJA accredited Jeweller ?
    • Really pleased that you won. UKPC know that you have supremacy of contract but still they persist because so many motorists blindly pay them.   Muppets.
  • 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

FSCS Decision letter on Pension


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2323 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

Dear those who have had decision letter or have Knowledge

 

The letter said my lost was £80,000 (this is what my pension would be worth)

however the amount they put as transferred was the amount my new current pension is worth £40,000(this is what they awarded me)

however at the time of transfer the amount was £19,000 NOT £40,000.

 

I am lead to believe that my current pension should not be used as a decision. Only the pension at the time of transfer.

 

Were they right to use my current pension figure as the amount transferred when it £19,000. less broker fees

 

My current pension is not income guaranteed it an shared investment policy

 

They also didn't take in to consideration life insurance attached or brokers or life time brokers fee attached to my pension

 

Do I need to make a separate claim for life insurances attached to my pension.

I was lead to believe this should of been included in the calculations

 

Any examples of FSCS Decision well be appreciated feel free to change figures and name

 

Dear all

 

 

The FSCS used my current pension figure as a lost sum however this was not the amount transferred and the model for this pension is not the same as the pension it was transferred from.

 

 

They did not include my life insurances attached to my pension or life time brokers fees.

 

 

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Notional transfer value of Civil Service

 

Pension scheme benefits

 

£73,995.68 £73,995.68

 

Valuation of Scottish Widows Pension

 

scheme

 

£38,524.98 £35500

 

£73,995.68 £38,524.98 £35,500

 

Net Lodgements: £35,470.70

 

Add Interest Equivalent Sum: £0.00

 

Eligible Amount: £35,500

 

Less Abatement: £0.00

 

Total Compensation Payable: £35,500

Total Compensation Paid To Date: £0.00

 

Total Payment Due: £35,500

 

The original amount was £21,000,

the new amount of £38,000 is what my pension is now.

Please note I wasn't in the civil service

 

This does not include my occupation life insurance attached my old pension or life broker fee deductible attached to my current pension.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so they owe you £35k

 

All the other valuations, benefits and deductions are taken into account so it matter not what things were

but they are supposed to use an equivalent value to place you into the same position as though you had never left the other scheme.

 

you claim what is at the bottom of the page, namely £35.5k

 

Once you retire the life insurance goes out the window so not a consideration

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank for your reply.

 

I'm not retired

my pension was transferred out to another pension provider without good advice

 

my current pension it's in more of a share type pension scheme

meaning that my pension will not be guaranteed

it can go up or down;

 

where as with the occupational pension that pension rate is guaranteed at the end of my retirement

 

I'm to believe that my life insurance would still remain on my pension despite me not actually being within the Civil Service until retirement.

This should of been taken into consideration and they should not of used my current pension scheme as a basis to value my pension

 

only the amount that was transferred into it

which was £21,000

 

considuring it was at a loss due to the property crash

 

I'm confused how this figure can be used.

Edited by vizkij
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

 

Yes I have.

And having done my own research life insurance (it is also on their example on their website, and guidance)

life insurance must be also included in calculations if on the policy at the time of transfer.

 

Unless you had to be in the job at the time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

was this old gov't 6% super annuation scheme and you serp'd out in 1992

when thatcher allowed millions of people to be sc@mmed out of their future pensions by the offer of a £200 backhander

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

the life insurance bit disappears when you are no longer paying into the scheme BUT there is an extra payout to dependants if you die withn a short time of retiring. This would apply to those members who were not still actively contributing as well but since you moved your pot out them wouldnt apply.

Go back to the FSCS and tell them that SW have failed to apy the right amount into your pot as instructed. stop going on about the life insurance, it is a red herring and may end up costing you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...