Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 13/07/20 in all areas

  1. Why do you think Johnson gives a damn when malnutrition in UK children is doubling https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/food-poverty-hunger-child-malnutrition-hospital-layla-moran-coronavirus-a9615161.html and all I can say is if the kids are malnourished, what the heck state will most of the parents be in? Shameful
  2. DWP have said that sanctions will only be applied as a last resort option, where the claimant is not meeting their claimant commitment requirements and they are not engaging with the Job Centre. It has always been the case, that for the first 3 months of claiming as an unemployed person, they can just apply for jobs which match their skill set. After 3 months they would be expected to widen their job search. So if a person is specialist in one type of employment, after 3 months of not being able to find a job in that particular field, if there are jobs stacking shelves at the local Supermarket, I think they would expect applications to be made. But this is most likely explained to claimants during commitment reviews.
  3. Thanks BF. I've sent them an email as follows; If I haven't heard back from them within a few days I'll follow it up by post, and see where it goes from there.
  4. You still have time to send a snotty letter in reply stating things the Team will suggest shortly, if you ignore it a Claimform will definitely follow, the Smart parking muppets have fewer braincells than a petrol head biker high on patrol vapour.
  5. What stage is your claim at now ? You submitted it in Oct 19 ...has it been allocated yet ? Andy
  6. Thanks - I got this off ABTA website If there are significant changes to the main characteristics of the holiday that mean a significant change to the holiday as whole you are entitled to an offer of an alternative holiday, or a refund of your holiday cost. ABTA cannot determine what is and isn’t a significant change to your particular package holiday, however a general overview of what might be a significant change is below: a change of resort; a change of accommodation to that of a lower category and/or price; a change of flight time or delay of flight of more than 12 hours (in respect of a 14-day duration. A change of flight time less than 12 hours may still be regarded as a significant change in respect of a lesser duration) or involving a reduction in time spent at the resort which is significant in relation to the length of the holiday; a change of airport that's inconvenient to you. If the holiday or trip can’t actually be provided due to closures and limitations, then you have a right to a refund. On Jet 2 T & C's it does say a change of accommodation is a minor change, however, I think that is subjective as what is minor to one person is possible significant to another and to me it is significant that the hotel is closed. They have not even said what they would offer me so I agree I don't think we should pay any balance until this is at least discussed. There are only 2 other hotels in Punta Prima which offer all inclusive and both get poorer reviews that the one we booked. I know this won't make a difference to Jet2, however one of them is also 1.5km from the beach! Our booked accommodation was actually on the beach. I am so frustrated with Jet 2 and unsure where to turn now.
  7. You should certainly point it out to them as quickly as possible. Do in writing. However, you will need to assess the cost of the damage – the repair –. I don't know anything about this vehicle – is a new vehicle? Although the damage might be unsightly, is it very important to you to get it repaired? Or would simply a financial compensation satisfy you?
  8. I have the same issue and have had advise such a roll a paper tissue and jam it under the top of the mask where is meets the nose. I've found simply breathing out through the nose reduces fogging completey.
  9. Well it seems slamdunk to me. Not only that but they refer specifically to the original order and that they ask you to sign and "amended order". The only other explanation is maybe they have received it from you. Could that be a possibility? I think I would initially drop them an informal line – by email and by letter saying that despite the amended order which you agree to on XXX date, you now see that the money which has been paid out you has had the full £850 deducted. With a please explain why this has happened and why the terms of the amended order you understood had been agreed had not been. Suggest that you send that after them immediately and will see what comes back. Maybe it is simply some misunderstanding and there is no point jumping the gun and started to issue threats if there is some innocent explanation. It certainly sounds a bit strange
  10. The Legal Ombudsman has a wider remit than the SRA, and can always refer matters on to the SRA where they find a breach of the SRA's code. I'd suggest writing to the solicitors, highlighting these issues, asking them to refund the money. If they don't then complain to the LO.
  11. I understand that you were involved in a contentious divorce in respect of which there was a bill for court costs – £850. You decided to challenge the costs in court and you lost and an order was made against you. We decided to appeal the order but before the appeal was heard, the solicitors made you a without prejudice offer of a 50-50 split – £425. You agree to this and you signed the document to that effect which you returned to the solicitors. Despite that the solicitors are now trying to impose the original £850 order. Is that the correct order of events? "Without prejudice" is certainly something that doesn't seem to be very well understood, including by solicitors. "Without prejudice" can protect an offer from being disclosed to the court where the offer has been refused so that it is not binding on anyone. However, without prejudice cannot be used to hide everything from the court – including wrongdoings, unethical behaviour et cetera. It seems to me that once you sign the agreement you effectively had a contract. I'd like to know a little bit more about the agreement that you signed but presumably it was intended to bring a halt to any further proceedings. I don't think there is any difficulty about disclosing a contract to the court in the circumstances. It is only the offer which was made without prejudice. Once the agreement was accepted and signed then the document acquired a wholly different character. It was no longer an offer open to be accepted or refused. It was a legally binding contract which imposed obligations upon both sides. In my view the solicitors have acted in a highly unethical way and I would begin by making a complaint to the SRA. I wonder whether the solicitors proposed the 50-50 split to you without consulting with their client and when they then contacted their client and told her what had been agreed, she refused to accept it and on that basis the solicitors recognised that they had made an error but rather than accept their responsibility and footing the £425 out of their own pockets, they preferred to get it from you. Of course this is just speculation but it seems to me to be quite a possible scenario. I'd like to see the agreement post up here please – that my sense is that you should complain to the SRA and you should tell the solicitors that this is what you're doing.
  12. Ha! reading those was fun! I hope the OP reads them as they clearly show that UKPC don't have a leg to stand on presuming their signage is equally poor.
  • Create New...