Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
    • In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below: Claim Claim number: xxxxx Reference: P2G MAY 2024   Claimant xxxxx   Defendant Parcel2Go 1A Parklands Lostock Bolton BL6 4SD  Particulars of Claim The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx   Details of claim Amount claimed £276.80 I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys! As ever, many thanks - G59    
    • Hmm, that's strange how they got my email then.  I assume the below is ok to send to DCBL, Nicky?  Hello, I am writing regarding our ongoing dispute and the upcoming court claim reference xxxxxxxx. To ensure fairness and transparency in our communications leading up to the court hearing, I request that you use postal mail exclusively for all further correspondence related to this claim. Please refrain from sending any communication or documents via email. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. If you have any questions or need clarification, please feel free to contact me via postal mail at the address provided above. Yours sincerely, xxxx
  • 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

Carers Allowance IUC


Green-girl16
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1984 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 so angry at my partner.

 

I have just found out he is being investigated for benefit fraud.

He received a letter asking him to go for an interview under caution regarding his housing benefit, income support and carers allowance.

 

He was on these benefits before moving in with me.

He has ignored the letter and missed the interview.

I am intending on getting him to call tomorrow to talk to them and stop burying his head in the sand.

 

He was down as his mother’s carer.

He lived with a flat mate and had housing benefit and income support also paid.

He started work and cancelled his income support and housing benefit.

He wrongly assumed his carers allowance would be cancelled as a result too.

He never contacted them though and as a result has about a years overpayment now.

 

The carers allowance has always gone into his mother’s account and she always kept it herself.

It was the arrangement they had...he got the income support and she kept the carers allowance.

But because it continued to go into her account he never realised it was still being paid and she never said anything to him about it.

 

Next thing we know he receives this letter.

The letter states it’s also about housing benefit and income support too.

He definitely didn’t receive them in the past year so I can only assume they’re doing a big investigation about everything he’s ever received now.

 

Whats likely to happen to him??

I’m so worried and so angry at him for not phoning to cancel in the first place and being so stupid to just assume all benefits are linked and let each other know about any changes!

 

I’m also so annoyed at his mother as she never said anything this whole year and was receiving money she was not entitled to in his name!

He’s going to be the one facing the consequences but she’s been the one with the money in her account!

 

What happens now?

Will he be prosecuted?

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

If he attends and provides full information, more likely to be a debt amount to be paid and a civil penalty amount.

 

If he does not attend, then it won't go away. I suppose he could face prosecution at some stage.

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

He needs to attend as failing to do so will probably result in the case being passed through for prosecution, as he has started work and in theory failed to notify the relevant department and they would have obtained his earnings for the relevant period.

 

If as you say, he has stopped his HB and IS claim and given the reason as started work, he could use the fact he told the DWP i.e. the relevant department that he notified them and that they did not fully act on the information and close down his CA claim at the same time as IS.

 

If he ended the claim as he formed a relationship[, then he is on a slightly sticky wicket as he should have told CA about his income, presuming it is over the income threshold of I think £110 or thereabouts a week and would have to explain any reason why he did not notify them of this.

 

He would/should also have gotten an uprating/yearly award letter in March/April time to show what he was getting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomtom, yes he most definitely informed housing benefit and income support. He just wrongly assumed income support would let carers allowance know. Yes his earning are above £110 a week. He works in excess of 40 hours at minimum wage. He may of had a letter sent in March/April about the yearly award but this wouldn’t have come to where he lives now as the carers allowance is linked to a previous address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case he needs to attend an interview and use the fact he told the DWP i.e. Income Support that he had started work and that he expected them to close all his claims with them and/or notify the other sections within the DWP that he had started work, on a once and done type of approach and that as far as he was aware the that was the end of it as he had notified them correctly that he had started work.

 

Hopefully the investigator dealing has already checked with HB and IS for the reasons they ended so should be aware that he had notified them.

 

Should they decide to take it to court via the CPS, it is highly unlikely they would accept the case based on that reasoning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input tomtom. I’m hoping this is the case. And the fact that the money is paid into his mother’s account and always has been as he initially had difficulty in opening a bank account will go in his favour as he clearly wasn’t the one receiving the money so had no reason to question payments still being made as he wasn’t even aware.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...