MBNA sold debts that belonged to both me and my husband. Idem bought mine, Moorcroft bought my husbands. I emailed Idem regarding reduced payments that I would make, and eventually they responded agreeing to my reduced amount. However, Moorcroft ignore emails (sent day after day) and they will not reply despite my husband requesting that they not call, but put in writing instead. They call anyway, and to whomever called, I asked them not to call, but to respond to my husband's emails - however, the chap then called my husband's mobile immediately! I got a statement from Idem, and in exactly the same marked envelope (same return address, same statement format) my husband had one from Moorcroft. Does anyone know if this is the same company??? It's really cheesing me off that Moorcroft ignore all the emails. Also, they're sneaky so-and-so's: they are based hundreds of miles away from us, and yet they call the landline using a local number that they must buy to use, to look like they're someone local calling us - idiots! It doesn't take long for me to recognise the number and ignore it. But, they're making me so mad!!! I think I'm wasting my time re-sending the same emails but at least it proves the point that they're ignoring us, dispite contacting them on a daily basis!

My Mother is 96 and has had a M&S CC for many years, used for phone and online shopping which also gave her a feeling of independence as she rarely left the house. She began displaying signs of dementia late last year following a stroke, then fell at Christmas suffering a v serious head injury and was not expected to survive. She was eventually stabilised, though only after two scary doubt-filled relapses. It was then immediately clear that her dementia had deepened v substantially, and to make a long and very evil story short my Mother has in just a few weeks been replaced by someone who looks like her but has no memories, doesn't retain anything she is told conversationally for longer than 30-60 seconds, has no retained awareness therefore of her circumstances or where she is, who never has a yesterday to help her understand today, is confused on a good day and distressed on a bad one, doesn't recognise friends/some-family, and only occasionally recognises me when I tell her who I am. She is now in permanent residential dementia care where we continue to visit a very frail stranger unable to look after herself and needing help with all aspects of daily life, and that we love very much but can do nothing to help, only ... observe. Anyway ... I am dealing with her personal affairs. I would like to know please whether a card-issuer - M&S in this case - has legitimate recourse to family if the card-holder is neither competent nor capable and is unable to settle an outstanding balance, in this case just under £2K. Today the State takes all of Mum's pension and benefits to offset some of the £900+ p.w. cost of her Care, with the exception of a few pounds as so-called pocket-money to provide "personal treats" like toothpaste and replacement clothes/undies etc. Treats? There is no longer any possibility of the outstanding balance being settled by Mum from any source at all, she has no assets and had been getting by just okay on her State Pension+ small benefits whilst in a sheltered-housing bungalow since my Father died. I have been far too preoccupied to bother with the M&S reminder-letters over the past three months, but should take control before things escalate. I don't have any problem ignoring DCs if M&S moves it along, however I'd rather put the brakes on with M&S before that stage. So, to repeat my question ... I assume that in Law M&S would have recourse to income or assets, however there are none and I am wanting to know if In Law there is then permitted-recourse to family for the debt? If they try to make noise instead of writing the balance off, I am perfectly capable of berating M&S very robustly about pursuing a 96 year old woman in residential care with dementia! However, before then I want to be clear in my mind about the legitimacy of any other channels they may claim to be entitled to pursue for recovery. In reality they would actually be unsuccessful that way also as I am 71, retired with no assets and only state pension income, and with debts and obligations of my own already after a past business-collapse. I'm not concerned with that just now however, just in knowing whether M&S would be on solid ground if they should respond by saying that in these circumstances the debt becomes the responsibility of someone's family to settle if their assets/estate isn't able to cover it. So can someone advise on that one point please? Thanks! Howard

Hoping this is the correct forum so apologise if not. After a good two years being ill I managed to get a job starting last January at a local SEN school as a Teaching Assistant. Upon calling me with the news the Head told me not to get too excited as it was only until July. A few days after I started I was conversing with the HR Head about something else when I mentioned to her about this Fixed Term Contract. She told me that I was on a Permanent Contract so I assumed that the 6 months the Head was talking about was the 3 then 6 months probation. Got through 3 months fine but today I was called into a conversation with the Assistant Head and was told my contract was not being renewed because next years student numbers have dropped and the student that I was partially one to one with is no longer classed as one to one. For clarification I was helping many students as I was told that one to one is in name only and I was working in the class with all. However I mentioned to the Asst Head that I was a tad confused as HR had told me I was on a Permanent Contract. The Asst looked a tad confused themselves and said they would look into it and mentioned that if I was on a Fixed Contract they would not have done any probation which confused me again because it was this Assistant Head that received my Line Managers 3 month probation form so you would have expected it to have flagged up a possible contract error. A massive kick in the teeth is that I also received a staff email later on that says they are recruiting for Teaching Assistants for next year and yet I am told I am surplus to requirements because they don't need any more TA's despite at the meeting being told that all feedback on my efforts are positive and that my contract isn't being renewed purely down to numbers not being required?! If I am honest I have never got on with this particular Assistant Head. They belittle many people and are generally disliked by a larger proportion of the staff and from day one I could tell that she had a problem with me for whatever reason. So I wouldn't be surprised if they just want me out. However if they have had a breakdown in communication and whilst I was originally meant to be on a Fixed Term Contract but HR accidently put me on a Permanent One what are my rights here? I have gone through the contract with a fine toothcomb and I cannot fond anywhere where it says it's Fixed Term and whilst there is a commencement date there is not expiry date. If they have made an error they may try another excuse but if I have been already told that the only reason for my dismissal is that they do not require me next year then what can I do if another excuse/reason is put forward in another meeting? I love the job and obviously feedback on my performance is positive and whilst I would love to stay this is an incredibly awkward situation for both sides but if I am correct and I am on a Permanent Contract and they have made an error what if any rights do I have? Most appreciated.

Hi, thought I'd see if I could find any useful advice here. I'm very anxious so any good pointers much appreciated! I'll keep it as brief as I can: I'm a one-man IT dept for a medium size organisation - permanent position that has risen in seniority over 12 years. My line manager is proposing a reorganisation that will end my current role and replace it with an extremely similar role on a 2-year fixed term contract. Redundancy is an option, and I am unsure as yet if 'they' are keen for me to take it, or take the new role. I want to stay on, and I believe the new role is precisely my current role just with a new job title and an improved job description. My current job description is pretty vague, but the new role describes precisely the work I have been doing for years. The only real difference is that some more junior responsibilities will be removed and given to a new, junior role (which is great). If I take the new role on 2yr FTC, I presume I will not get redundancy at the end of that contract if they choose to let me go. I cannot afford to lose my job security like that! I have a 1st consultation coming up, and I will argue that the new role represents what I do currently. So my questions are... Can they do this? If I can prove that the new role describes precisely what I currently do, can they still make my post redundant and leave me with the choice of changing to FTC? If I took the FTC, might I nevertheless be considered to have been continuously employed for my 12 years+, and would that render the 'fixed term' irrelevant as I would be considered permanent in law? I don't know, but this is a possibility I have gathered might be the case from googling around. If 'they' would rather I left, can they even make me redundant when they are replacing my role with such a materially similar one, albeit FTC? I have absolutely no history of failing to perform or being told of any problems with my work, so there are no grounds for dismissal. As I said I'm going to argue that the new role is my current role, I want it, and I don't want to be FTC. I think I have a good case, but I'd love to be able to reference actual laws that back up this position! Thanks again if anyone has any guidance.

Hello folks - grateful to anyone who can help with this. My wife has worked in the same organisation for the last four years. She has had four separate one-year contracts during this time. Her contracted hours have varied slightly from contract to contract, but for the last two (one-year) contracts has had 19 per week. She was told a few weeks ago that, due to the fact she's been there for four years, she is being put onto a permanent contract. The permanent contract however offers three fewer hours per week than she currently works, even though they will expect her to work the same number of hours this year and claim the three hours as "overtime" (though this "overtime" is not paid at a higher rate.) Is there some disadvantage to her with this arrangement? Her holiday entitlement will presumably be determined by her contracted hours, rather than the contract plus "overtime" worked regularly. Is this right? I guess the employer misrepresenting her normal hours worked, perhaps in order to maintain some flexibility if they decide they don't want her to work the extra three hours after all? Can they do this - putting her onto a permanent contract with three fewer hours than she has had over the less couple of years? What options does she have, if this arrangement does actually work against her unfairly? Many thanks to anyone who can offer advice.

Hello, please, i have question, my friend have a car in czech, this car is permanent to export (but have plates, and certificate - see attachment), and now. I have interest for this car, is possible to get back registrate in uk? When yes, how is process? Thank you! Removed by Admin this is certificate of car.

I have been working for an agency for 4 years now, doing the same job, on the same site for 3 and a half of those. A couple of years ago, the company started taking on 'flexi' workers. A couple of months ago, i was advised to apply for this round of 'flexi' jobs. I asked if the job i have been doing is available as one of those jobs, and was told, in no uncertain terms, that no, there will never be a flexi worker doing that job. On that basis, i didnt apply. I have discovered yesterday, that indeed the flexis are taking over that job. Is there anything i can do? the flexis they gave the job to, are less skilled, and much less experienced, and at least one is waiting to get his qualification so he can even start training.

I am approaching the end of my agency contract and soon the client will have to take a decision on what to do with me. The length of the contract was only agreed verbally with the client company and not included in the written contract with the agency, so technically this is a rolling contract. The possible realistic outcomes are three: 1) My contract is not renewed and I go back to JSA. 2) The contract is either renewed with a fixed date or kept rolling for the time being. 3) The client employs me and I end up in their books. I have been approached several times by the managers and I was given a lot of praise for my work and I have been told how keen they are to have me in their books. However for a number of reasons (including ethical ones, plus the fact that I would be facing very difficult and abusive people, which I can't and won't handle) I told them I am not keen on being employed permanently but I would be very glad to keep on as a contractor, even if that means less hours and less money. The managers looked very disappointed with my feedback and told me they need to think about it and we are going to discuss this maybe in 2-3 weeks. My question is: when the big day comes and should I turn down an offer of full employment, while retaining my availability for contract work, would the DWP consider this as making myself voluntarily unemployed? Thanks

Hi I have a couple of queries about holiday pay if anyone could please help please. My husband was made redundant in July from a permanent position, he is lucky to have found another permanent job to start in September and meanwhile he has worked several temp jobs here and there. Previous permanent position - basically he worked for this company for 7 years, he moved to another job for three months & hated it so went back, they were glad to have him back but one day before his three month 'probabtionary period' he & many others were made redundant out of the blue. During his three months back he only had the bank holidays off so two days. He is entitled to 20 days plus bank holidays per year. His letter informing him of his redundancy states that as he was in his probabtionary period (by one day) he is not entitled to be paid for any holiday owed. Is this right? I thought I read that holiday rights accrue from day one? Temp job 1 - only worked six hours at min wage so assume holiday pay would be very little. Temp job 2 - offered 6.94 hour but when payslip turned up it shows hourly rate 6.19 + holiday rate 0.75 per hour. I assume that this is them mis-informing my husband & there's not much we can do. Temp job 3 - 30 hours, payslip shows 6.19 per hour, no mention of holiday pay. Is holiday pay accrued from when you start? Temp job 4 - this is where he has had the most work, payslip shows £7 per hour, total 126 hours, there is no mention of holiday pay, no split of the pay rate etc. Should he therefore be entitled to holiday pay on this? Thanks for reading & taking the time to reply! Lennylegs

Hello all, I have been working in a school since Sept 12 on a Full Time permanent contract. The head has asked me to change that to a Fixed Term (FT) 1 year contract because it was a 'mistake'. What are my options? I really like the location and do not want to have the uncertainty of looking for a job, every year. I have come half way and said that I am fine with a change/addition to the Job Desc. but not for the change of the actual contract. what is the worst case scenario as I do not have anything to lose now and how far can I take this? What will I lose? I can always go to supplying and my credentials are excellent. Others who have come after me have had a FT perm contract and they have not been asked to change to a Fix Term one. Please advise.

Hi I presently have a fulltime job, but I wish to leave as the amount of stress has been making me ill, consequently I am now off sick. The job has changed greatly and more and more workload is being added all the time. I have had a meeting with my line manager, but they are not willing to change anything, so I know that the job won't get any better. I have been offered the possibility of working a temporary job for the run up to Christmas. It's a job that I did when I was at university, so I know what it will entail, but it will definitely end at Christmas. I would be willing to work my notice with the permanent job as well as working the temporary job, due to shifts, but after the Christmas period I would be unemployed, though I would be actively hunting another job, even if it's another temporary position. My concern is, would I be able to sign on and receive JSA, as my last job would have been a temporary one that ran its course, but I had left a permanent job for it? Obviously I wouldn't be intending to be receiving JSA for long, but you cannot be certain of how long it would take to get the next job.

We are a family of 4 with a British mum and a French dad (me) and have been living in the UK from 2004 to August 2010. Both kids were born in the UK. We have bought a car registered in the UK in 2005. Before going to live in France in August 2010, we have informed HM revenue and customs and London borrow we were becoming permanent resident in France, and got our revenue and local tax refund in October 2010. Before leaving the country, with our UK registred car, and crossing the channel, I’ve insured our vehicle with a French insurer and stopped our insurance in the UK. While in France, I’ve scheduled the French plate registration (which takes some time while you start a new job, with all sorts of other administration work to do on both countries): · In October 10: I’ve removed the UK headlights with French ones I’ve bought on line · December 10: I have paid to receive the certificate of European compliance from the head quarter of the car maker · January 11: I’ve passed successfully the French MOT: “contrôle technique” · March 11: I’ve paid for French plate registration at the "préfecture" called the : "carte grise” · March/April 11: sent the V5C/4 section 11: notice of permanent export to DVLA End of July and beginning of August 2012 we have received 2 letters from a Bailiff & Debt recovery agency for Late Licensing Penalty issued the 01/01/11 on behalf of DVLA. Both letters were issued in April and May 2012, but took more than 2 months to reach us as the streetless address was the aggregate of our French village with the correct French post code, France and our previous town in England with a wrong post code !! We were very lucky to have a descendant of Sherlock Holmes working at the Royal Mail and a nephew of commissaire Mégret working at "la poste" in France working as a team to deliver the 2 letters. I’ve called the Bailiff & Debt recovery agency twice, the first time I’ve informed them it must be a mistake because we were permanent resident in France before the DVLA penalty was issued, and they have kindly recommended me to contact DVLA, but was apologising for not having any entry point for DVLA to give me (not the standard case). The second time, before DVLA’s answer, I’ve asked them what would happen if I didn’t pay the penalty and did refuse to travel to County court from France, noticing my address in France, they have answered, they can’t do anything about it , which I suppose puts us in a safer position to fight back against this unfairness. I’ve mailed and emailed DVLA, in a similar way, except there was more evidence in attachement about our residence in the paper version. I’ve received quickly an email answer from DVLA : "Thank you for your email received on 31/7/12. Your email reference number is xxxx. Having checked DVLA records, I can confirm that we have received the notification of export of your vehicle. However the date supplied on the notification is not the same as you have quoted in your e-mail. Please see the advice below which may be of interest to you. If you have received a penalty letter from a debt collection agency, sent on behalf of DVLA, you should follow the instructions on the letter you have received. If, however, you believe there are circumstances, which should be brought tothe attentionof the debt collection agency, you must put these in writing.Their address canbe found on the front of the letter you have received. This information will then be considered before any further action is taken.” I’ve already answered with all the detail, to DVLA, which can be summarised: we acknowledge we have sent the notice of export in Q1 11 after the penalty was issued (01/01/11), but that is not our point Our point is: We were resident in France at the time the penalty was issued in January 2011, and have received a tax refund letter in October 2010 from HM revenue and customs which acknowledges this fact. Once becoming resident in France, we were governed by French laws and so our belongings, including our car staying permanently in public roads in France, therefore we are not liable to pay this penalty as were released from our DVLA licensing duties once leaving the country permanently. It seems it would have been preferable to send the notice of permanent export to DVLA when leaving the UK and before the 1st January 2011, but the V5C/4 section 11 document does not define the permanent export, and I find it easier to officialise the permanent export once you have registred with the new plate, as it is quite a long process with a date difficult to plan beforehand. In fact I've learnt more from others who were in the same situation on forum and web sites, and if we have left the UK, earlier in the year,r we would haven't faced the issue. Depending on years French laws forces you to registre an imported car in the first month, or the first 6 months after your arrival, the have changed the laws several times, but they do not check it, nor issue a penalty, as they don't want to put you off the registration of french plates which bring them €200. The background questions of the dispute are: ·which law prevails in that case? ·if the county court is not competent for that case which court is it? ·known any similar case and outcome? ·How do DVLA manages penalty recovery and a dispute abroad ? ·Chances that DVLA drops this case (this case is rather a head ache for DVLA, but still to good to share with other guys in the same situation)?

CAP post 2013: greening, Ecological Focus Areas and permanent grasslands Despite most EU farm ministers wanting to design national ‘greening’ proposals to suit the needs of their own countries, Dacian Ciolas, the EU Farm Chief, warned against such a ‘menu approach’, saying that it would be complex to administer! Heaven forbid that the policy works better but is a bit more complicated for Brussels! Also, the EC is likely to be wary of giving too much power back to Member States! More sensibly, he suggested that work done under agri-environment schemes and other Rural Development measures or an environmental certification scheme would count towards greening measures. Finally the message seems to have sunk in that people who already do ‘greening’ work should not be penalised! The plan is to agree the greening proposals in June. A large number of Member States remain vocally opposed to the 7% of farmers’ eligible hectares, excluding areas under permanent grassland, as Ecological Focus Areas as being too high. The proposed change to the definition of ‘permanent grasslands’ to include traditional extensive grazing areas with heather and shrubs has been welcolmed by the UK. With thanks to SG Landscope.