Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • 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

DRO cancelled due to UC back payment - is my Official Receiver correct - UC is not a disability benefit?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2105 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,

The offical receiver has told me that he intends to cancel my DRO (3 weeks before it was due to finish) as I now have over £1000 in the bank due to a back payment of Universal Credit.

 

I have received this money because the DWP declared me unfit for work and work related activity following a work capacity assessment.

 

I was very surprised he did this as many benefit sites and advisors said that this would not happen because I had received this money due to my medical condition.

(Crohn's Disease)

 

I am in a full Universal Credit area and I have heard that this money would have been disregarded had I been claiming Pip or other sickness benefits with a disability premium.

 

I was wondering what the law is regarding this?

I went to see CAB and they managed to talk to the assistant to the official reciever

but he stonewalled and was arguing that because my benefit did not include the words disability premium they did not have to ignore it.

He also said that he did not want to reverse the decision in case it set a precedent!

 

Cab tried to argue that it was a disability PREMIUM, and sent me on a trip to my local benefit office to ask if I could get a letter stating this.

However they said that Universal Credit does not have a disability premium.

 

I asked a lot of people as to what would happen about this backdated money including Debt Camel, Step Change, Debtline and they were all wrong

 

I would like to know where the law stands since I think I am being given the shaft with the Insolvency Service using a play on words as an excuse to cancel my DRO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

probably a good thing

 

who said all of your debts within your DRO are enforceable...esp if you are paying any DCA's?

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

Why would I be paying a DCA during the duration of a DRO. Surely you know that during a DBO my debtors are not allowed to contact me?

 

I don't think that the Insolvency Service are up to speed on Universal Credit.

 

Either that or this is some new policy to help out the banks and credit card companies where everybody on Universal Credit who is still recieveing a payment for limited capacity for work and work related activity is being screwed over!

 

A lump sum from benefits back-dating

 

These may sound large but they are often not a problem because this treated as “income” over the period the back-dating relates to not “capital”.

 

The question is would you have exceeded the “spare income of £50” limit if you had been getting the correct amount of benefits all the time.

 

If the benefit is a claim for disability (PIP, DLA, AA) then an extra cost line for the disability would also be included in this re-calculation.

 

In 2018 the government is reviewing a lot of Pip awards

– if you get a backdated sum for this, it shouldn’t make a difference to your DRO as any disability benefits you receive should be offset with an expenses line labelled “adult care costs” or something similar. the net effect on your “disposable income” is then zero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what I meant is were any of your debts sold to DCA's before you took out the DRO...did you check their enforceability first?

 

I've moved your thread to the benefits forum and slightly retitled it, you'll probably get better results here

 

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

OK, I don't know anything about DROs and so on, but UC (when paid on grounds of limited capability for work) and ESA are not "disability" benefits in the commonly understood sense. They are "income replacement" benefits.

 

Some benefits, such as PIP or DLA are paid to assist with the extra costs of disability. This is why the decision to award them (or not) is based on an assessment of the claimants care or mobility needs. UC and ESA are intended to cover the costs of daily living: food, bills etc - costs that everyone has to deal with. This is presumably what your OR is thinking of.

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

Antone has hit the nail on the head.

 

UC is a means tested benefit, as is ESA income related benefit. They are to provide income to meet daily living costs and count as income.

 

DLA and PIP are different so they would not be counted in the same way.

 

The OR is correct in their assessment, that the LCWRA backdating is additional income that had not been considered before,

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

no

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

Thanks,

thats what I was wondering about.

 

In that case it looks like there is nothing I can do, but I'm going to spend just over a third of my money on white goods, clothes, bedding, food, rent and other things that I need for the house.

 

I wont be buying flat screen TVs or computers but I will keep £700 just in case I need to go bankrupt at a later date and I will use about half of my benefit money to offer my creditors a final settlement of 18p in the pound of what I owe. If they refuse then I will have no option but to go bankrupt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but the extra amount of Universal Credit that I receive was awarded after a work capacity assessment found that I was unfit to work because of my medical condition

.

I think this is just another case of smoke and mirrors from the Tories, just like when they changed the name of sick notes to fit notes.

 

Just because the benefit is not called disability benefit does not mean that it is not being given because of a disability or sickness which it clearly is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Limited Capability for Work and Work Related Activity element is awarded to those not capable of any work activity. It is additional income to help meet the increased cost of living that someone in this position might face. For example they might need to regularly attend Doctors or Hospital appointments. They might have extra costs to help them live their normal daily lifes.

 

In terms of backpay, I think the argument that you would make to the OR is that you have struggled to meet basic living costs over a period of time and what the consequences are. Demonstrate why this money is needed to help with your increased costs because of a disability.

 

I believe you can apply to the court to have this reviewed, but not sure of process.

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, you hit the nail on the head, in that everyone I've taken this to, including all the big advice agencies have failed to mention how and if I could take this further.

 

I did over hear a conversation between my CAB advisor and a senior member of the insolvency service, and he said that he did not want to overturn the decision in case it set a precedent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I am in a full Universal Credit area and I have heard that this money would have been disregarded had I been claiming Pip or other sickness benefits with a disability premium.

 

Not quite, if you were not in a full Universal Credit area, you would be receiving ESA instead.

If during the DRO moratorium you received a backdated award of ESA while also receiving PIP, you might have received a backdated payment of Severe Disability Premiums or Enhanced Disability Premiums if you were eligible for either payment.

 

However, regarding the property limit for a DRO, it is only the amount of the backdated disability premiums which is disregarded and not the full ESA backdated payment. Where the backdated ESA payment minus any disability premiums is over the £1000 DRO property limit, the DRO would be cancelled as it has been in your case.

 

Regarding no disability premiums being awarded under Universal Credit, that is purposeful cut to disability benefits introduced by the Conservative government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The back dated Universal Credit I recieved was for limited capacity for work and work related activity.

 

The fact that I was still able to recieve this over a year after it had been cancelled by the conservatives was because I first claimed Universal Credit eight months before the conservatives did away with this for sick people claiming Universal Credit.

 

The fact that it took over 21 months from when I first made my claim to me actually recieveing it is down to the conservatives and the D.O.W.P.s incompetence at rolling it out.

 

To be clear, if I had recieved this money after the 13 week assessment period, rather than waiting from 2016 to 2018 then my DRO would still be in force and I would not be looking at bankruptcy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The back dated Universal Credit I recieved was for limited capacity for work and work related activity. The fact that I was still able to recieve this over a year after it had been cancelled by the conservatives...

 

 

The limited capability for work and work related activity (LCWRA) component which existed as part of ESA still applies to Universal Credit. It is the limited capability for work (LCW) component which was scrapped for both new ESA claimants and UC claimants after 3 April 2017.

 

This cut the amount for (new) ESA and UC claimants deemed to have LCW by £29.05 per week. The £29.05 per week cut to LCW claimants is in addition to the disability premium cuts.

 

Your frustration is understandable but if you had been receiving the extra £29.05 per week when your DRO application was considered, that would have been counted as income towards the £50 per month DRO limit. You may still have been eligible for the DRO if that additional amount was incorporated in to expenses.

 

I don't agree with your DRO being cancelled but it's correct where the sum you have received is a backdating of your LCWRA component and is over £1000.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your frustration is understandable but if you had been receiving the extra £29.05 per week when your DRO application was considered, that would have been counted as income towards the £50 per month DRO limit. You may still have been eligible for the DRO if that additional amount was incorporated in to expenses.

 

 

That should not read £29.05 but the amount you receive as part of the LCWRA component so £X amount whatever that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I submitted a new budget to the OR which included the extra £328 for limited capacity for work and work related activity about 4 hours before I found out that the D.O.W.P. was going to give me a backdated payment on the very same day and the OR excepted my new budget which I completed with the help of Step Change.

 

This is how I know that I would have been okay had I received this money over a period of time instead of recieveing a lump sum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I submitted a new budget to the OR which included the extra £328 for limited capacity for work and work related activity about 4 hours before I found out that the D.O.W.P. was going to give me a backdated payment on the very same day and the OR excepted my new budget which I completed with the help of Step Change.

 

This is how I know that I would have been okay had I received this money over a period of time instead of recieveing a lump sum.

 

Before this lump sum was paid, did you owe any previous debts to DWP, HMRC or Council Tax ?

 

If so, any lump sum created is normally offered towards the debts. But the DRO might have stopped such an action.

 

UC normally pay any backdated amount as a lump sum to the claimant, unless the amount can be offered against existing Government debt.

 

If you want to fight this, you really need advice from someone that offers legal advice on disability benefits and debt. Have a search online for organisations that might be able to assist you.

We could do with some help from you.

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

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I submitted a new budget to the OR which included the extra £328 for limited capacity for work and work related activity about 4 hours before I found out that the D.O.W.P. was going to give me a backdated payment on the very same day and the OR excepted my new budget which I completed with the help of Step Change.

 

This is how I know that I would have been okay had I received this money over a period of time instead of recieveing a lump sum.

 

 

If you receive notice that the DRO has been revoked, you can challenge the revocation on these grounds, although you should speak to your DRO adviser or approved intermediary before dong so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...