Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That thread details the issues I had against the Local Authority about the same issue. This is directed at DWP.
  2. Overpayment decision was made in June 2015, we immediately made a mandatory reconsideration within the same month which DWP refuse to acknowledge. We have raised a formal complaint to DWP who advise that we should have chased it up sooner and that it's now too late. During this time we also escalated to our local authority and exhausted their complaints procedure. As we both suffer from anxiety dealing with this is extremely challenging. We have now recently made an Appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal who have struck out the case as it is outside of the absolute time limit. I do not consider this appeal to be outside of the absolute time limit of 13 months for the following reasons: - 1. DWP have FAILED to issue the required notice after multiple attempts to my original mandatory reconsideration dated 20th July 2015. Rule 24(1)(c) of Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008 places the “decision-maker” (i.e. the DWP in this instance) under a MANDATORY duty to issue a response to the Tribunal “as soon as reasonably practicable”. The fact the appeal has been mislaid/lost / not registered on an internal system doesn’t negate the DWP’s duty. 2. DWP has failed on multiple occasions in its legal duty to issue such a response “as soon as reasonably practical” (CH/3497/2005). As the DWP continue in its failure to recognise and process my mandatory reconsideration dated 20th July 2015, I am requesting HMCTS issue a Direction (under rule 6) requiring the DWP to comply with its duty under rule 24. In support, R(H) 1/07 (para 34) in which it was found that an appeal could bypass the decision-making body where that body failed to administer an appeal appropriately. What is the best next course of action as I feel as if we are banging our head against a wall and the court have missed the point that as the mandatory response was never issued we cannot be outside of the time that only starts when the response is issued?
  3. Wit hregards to the CCJ I get my credit report from experian, equifax, callcredit and no CCJ is registered. I have also not received any notification from court confirming a CCJ has been registered. Can I not issue a claim in county court for compensation because their actions have put me at a disadvantage leaving me no way to defend this claim and yet they are still taking money even though it clearly in dispute.
  4. Thanks for the response Craig, I email the court 2 maybe 3 months ago with regards to the case and no where in the email does it state or suggest they have appealed and I have not received any notification from the courts of such either which I would do I assume. I have also now had any notification from the high court of a case that is going to be heard. Again I think I would have to to be able to put in a defence. I have pointed this out to them before but no notice was taken the same as they have not responded to any of my SAR or a judges request. When we was in court the judge asked me and the LA to sit down and come up with a agreement. At this point I baught up the in order for this to happen I need all the document in which I have requested provided to me. I the judges words "Do you have the requested documented" LA "yes" Judge "Provide them to the claimant then". It clear from the communication and actions of the LA they have no regard for the Law. How can I complain to as this is shocking at should be allowed to happen. If I bake the law I am either arrested or made to prove my own innocence.
  5. For over 12 months the LA have been deducting 3 attachment of earnings for council tax and 1 for housing benefit. The balance in which is now going to the high court and thread is predominantly about is housing benefit and not council tax. I do not understand how I successfully defended the claim in county court and now they are taking in to high court. I also applied to magistrates court to have the liability orders quashed for council tax. The judge ordered them to provide me all the information requested this was 3 months ago and not received anything that address all of my requests as stated in my original thread.
  6. My question, I understand this is not a credit agreement however If my Local Authority (LA) has broken the law in an attempt to recover an over payment how can it then use the courts? When it comes to finance:- (1) Failure to comply with the law means that the agreement becomes unenforceable while the failure to comply persists, and the courts have no discretion to allow enforcement. (2) In such cases, a firm should in no way, either by act or omission, mislead a customer as to the enforceability of the agreement. (3) In particular, a firm should not in such cases either threaten court action or other enforcement of the debt or imply that the debt is enforceable when it is not. Backstory:- In 2012 received a letter inviting me to a interview under caution. I attended and then never heard anything for 2 years then I received a letter advising they are not going to pursue criminal charges but are going to recover the debt just under 15k. Here is my catalogue of errors:- 26/11/2015 A subject access request was issued to LA under the data protection act 1998. The request was made for any and all evidence that LA holds that suggests or confirms that I was overpaid any type of benefits. (STILL NOT RECEIVED A RESPONSE) 27/11/2015 - 1 A dispute was raised under The Housing Benefit Regulations 2006. The legislation specifically states that just because an overpayment is recoverable, does not mean that it must be recovered. The law goes on to confirm that a recoverable overpayment may be recovered at the local authority's discretion which must be documented. A subject access request was issued to LA under the data protection act 1998. The request was made for the document that confirms that a meeting did take place and that LA decision to recover the debit is both within the guidelines and lawful. 27/11/2015 - 2 A dispute was raised under Regulations 17 to 30 and Schedules 1 and 2 of The Social Security (Overpayments and Recovery) Regulations 2013. This was raised due to LA issuing an attachment of earning order (DAE – Dated 24/11/2015) to my employee seeing a deduction rate of 20%. The legislation confirms that the deduction rate will be 11% only. 27/11/2015 - 3 A dispute was raised under The Social Security (Overpayments and Recovery) Regulations 2013. The legislation clearly confirms that I and my partner should of received a “letter before action” before any DEA was processed. It also clearly confirmed that “A DEA cannot be requested against a partner’s earnings”. On 24/11/2015 I received a copy of a letter which was address to partners employer ordering them to deduct money from my partners salary. Again the rate the requested was 20% which is unlawful as pointed out above. Furthermore to this it is illegal to issue a DEA to my “partners” employer as documented in the legislation. 30/11/2015 I received an email from LA confirming they have broken the law by trying to recover the debt unlawfully. 17/12/2015 I raised a dispute surrounding the service in which I had received through the process of LA trying to recover the money. I explained clearly to LA that I had plans to declare myself bankrupt. In response LA stated that if I did declares me bankrupt that LA could still lawfully recover the debt. After review of the Housing Benefit Overpayments Guide for Local Authorities it’s clear that the debt will be written off as per the normal bankruptcy process. To add to this I would also like to bring your attention to the following documentation which is taken directly from the DWP guide:- 32. DWP had previously held the view that a benefit overpayment (including HB or Council Tax Benefit (CTB)) does not become a fixed liability until such time as the decision maker has made a determination that the overpayment, or part of it, is recoverable under social security legislation. 33. This was confirmed in 2005 in the case of ® Steele v Birmingham City Council and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. You can refer to previous bulletins HB/CTB U1/2011, HB/CTB U6/2011, and HB/CTB U1/2012 34. When a debtor is discharged from bankruptcy then any non-fraud debts, where the end date of the overpayment is before the date of the bankruptcy order, must be written off. This must take effect immediately. 35. Legal advice is that DWP should do everything possible to identify cases impacted by this judgement. Source:-http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/pdfs/G10_2013.doc Once again this documentation confirms that the debt will be written off as per the normal bankruptcy process. I believe this evidence confirms that LA deliberately miss lead I to increase LA possibility of recovering the overpayment of benefits which again is acting unlawfully and unfairly. 11/04/2016 - 1 To date I have not received a response to my subject access request dated 26/11/2015. This is a clear breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. As a result I have to assume that they have no evidence that suggests or confirmed that I & my partner where living together. 11/04/2016 - 2 To date I have not received a response to my subject access request dated 27/11/2016. This is a clear breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. As a result I have to assume that the meeting never took place and as a result I would also like to challenge that the policy of LA would is not in the interest of claimants; and would prevent the use of discretion. As per the legislation each case should be considered on its own merits having regard to the claimant's circumstances. 11/04/2016 - 3 To date I have not received a direct response to my complaint surrounding the service to which I have received from LA. 29/09/2016 A subject access request was issued to LA (Halton Borough Council) under the data protection act 1998. The request was made for a copy of the liability order. LA have responded to my request but have only provided me with a bill not the information requested. 07/10/2016 As per the Attachment of Earnings Act 1971 a maximum of TWO orders can be deducted at any one time and I have to be issued with a copy of each order. I have not received a copy of any order and as of 7/10 they are now taking THREE at once. Another point I would like to raise is under section 4.241 of the Social Security (Overpayments and Recovery) Regulations 2013 “4.241 When an appeal is brought before recovery has begun, or during recovery, it is good practice to suspend action until the appeal has been decided“. LA have ignore this legislation and continued to attempt to recover the overpayment when there are several disputes still outstanding. Again this is unlawful. More Case Law support my claim:- 2. R (on the application of Newham London Borough Council) v Stratford Magistrates' Court &Selwyn Dublin (Interested Party)[2008] EWHC 125 (Admin), [2008] RA 108, [2008] All ER (D) 17 (Jan) [2008]. The court must be satisfied that one of the following conditions are met: • the order was made as a result of asubstantial procedural error, defect or mishap, and / or • that there was a genuine dispute as to that liability. substantial procedural error – I had not received an initial summons in relation to the claim in order to defend myself. The relevant legislation is outlined under Section 14 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980. there was a genuine dispute as to that liability – I have explained my dispute above. More supporting Case Law:- 3. R (Brighton and Hove City Council) v Brighton and Hove Justices [2004] EWHC 1980 (Admin) (“Brighton & Hove”). HHJ Burnton held that a court should not set aside a liability order unless it is satisfied that there is a genuine and arguable dispute as to the defendant’s liability for the rates in question, AND a. the order was made as a result of asubstantial procedural error, defect or mishap. AND b. the application to the justices for the order to be set aside is made promptly after the defendant learns that it has been made or has notice that an order may have been made. Prompt action should be taken within a matter of days or at most a very few weeks. genuine and arguable dispute – It’s clear that my argument is genuine. substantial procedural error, defect or mishap – I have proven above that the claimant is operating outside of the law on this matter to recover this debt. the application to the justices for the order to be set aside is made promptly after the defendant learns that it has been made – It has been less than 3 weeks since I was made aware of the liability orders. LA alsol processed a county court claim against myself for an over payment of housing benefits the case number is CXXXXXX I was successful in defending this claim and the claim was struck out on the 12th July 2016. I have now received a letter from my LA stating that they have entered my case into the High Court for Enforcement Proceedings. Where can I go from here any help would be appreciated.
  7. The landlord has is stiff refusing to accept any of my 3 offers and is persistent on either the full months rent or our 1 months notice to leave. He saying that as the tenancy agreement started on 26th October 2012 (12 month contract) He could evict us on 25th October 2014 and we could not do anything about it. Also he saying as we have always paid rent the begging of the month (cash) that the payment is late according to the agreement which is also cause for eviction. My arguments are he has only bought the to my attention now i'm forcing him to complete repair work he has admitted he does not want to and is still refusing too as he wants to sell. And as the contract lapsed in October 2013 its now a periodic tenancy and i right in assuming its 2 months notice as we pay rent monthly. I have spoken to the council also who have arranged a callback from environmental health.
  8. Been living in our property for over 2 years now. The issue we are having is as the landlord is planning on selling the property come February 2015 and he is now refusing to complete what I believe to be essential repairs. I live with my partner and 2 kids aged 4 and 3. In February 2014 he replaced one of the Lath and plaster walls in our 3rd bedroom with a plasterboard wall but refused to do the other side which is crumbling to the touch in our 2nd bedroom. At this point he also replace part of the wall in the landing which was roughly one foot high by 3 foot wide. To complete the work in the hall they stripped the whole wall and then expected me to pay for the wall and the room to be redecorated. I paid for the room to be redecorated and did plan on paying for the entire hall stairs and landing to be done but the wall where the repair had been done now started to deteriorate and is now also crumbling to the touch. For the past 6 months he has refused to do any repairs and we are still paying full rent on time each month. Issue I now have is im not happy paying full rent when repairs need doing. I have spoke to our local housing who cant do anything until he provides a "notice of quit" but I have requested this be he has refused to provide one. I also believe it will also be worth mentioning we have never had a gas safety certificate, EVER. When I approached him he said he don't need one which I know is a lie. The kitchen is also falling to pieces with the draws being hold on by expose screws and some of the plug sockets are coming away from the wall or don't work. I have spoke to him today and give 3 options. 1) He does the repairs and i continue to pay rent 2) I do the repairs and use the rent money to cover the cost and pay the rest to the landlord and provide invoices 3) We negotiate a reduce rate of rent. Just looking for some advise on my situation.
  9. How can they prove then they they complied fully with the ICO rules on default notices and if they cant then how can they upheld the default.
  10. I would suggest you speak to Natwest quickly as when they apply the interest or any charges if that takes you over your overdraft this will encourage more charges. You will probably need to set up some sort of standing order to clear your overdraft slowly until it hits 0 then go to your local branch and get the a/c closed. Barclays is a better bank also.
  11. yes it was a current account with a overdraft. I believed the a/c to be closed in 2009 and the balance being 0.
  12. I understand the purpose of a SAR and I have sent them a letter explaining I am entitled to a copy of the letter and also explained the only reason I want the letter is because I did not receive the original and to ensure the default was executed as per the ICO guidelines. They then emailed back saying that they have not treated my request as a SAR as its has to be in a particular format which after investigating their comments is nonsense according to the ICO information sheet on requested a SAR. That have also advised they only need to provide me with the date it was executed and they don't have to provide me with a copy, which I don't understand as how can they prove then it was properly executed. The only reason for this default is because they failed to close my a/c and as a result have charged me for a d/d boucnig and they this has snowballed unto £450 ish before they then closed the a/c due to inactivity and charges i guess.
  13. After obtaining a copy of my credit report I notice a new default had appeared that had not been on another other report from the same CRA. It was a default from Natwest from back in 2009. I sent them a request under the CCA, but they replied saying their not obliged to which is fine. I then sent them a SAR on the 14th May 2014. Did not get a reply withing 40 days so then send another letter allowing them another 7 days. On the 6th day i got a response saying they do not have a copy of the letter and they are not obliged to sent me one. They have not treated my a request as a SAR as they have to be in a certain format. I then sent them a letter back advised the only reason I wanted a copy was to check if it was properly executed as I never received a copy. I also explained that a SAR request does not have to been in a particular format and attached the ICO guidelines. They have just issued a final response ignoring my comment on ICO guidelines with the SAR being a particular format and again confirmed they are not obliged to provide me with a copy and only have to provide they date it was sent. Where do I go from here? I can provide all the letter between me and Natwest if needed.
  14. Thanks for your reply again Andy, All the figures are correct on the terms such as monthly payments, ammout of loan, APR etc... .. But no where, anywhere within the paperwork i was given does it say or infer in any legal term as far as I can see and I again double checked it all last night that the interest is front loaded. If i knew this was case I would of disputed it at POS as i knew i would be in a postion 12 to 18 months into the agreement to clear it and now they want more then the initial loan amount to clear the remainder of the a/c. If needed I can post a copy of the prescribed terms here and will just remove all my personall data to help calrify.
  15. Sorry I should me more clear, I have checked all the paperwork I have, including the prescribed terms. Everything I would expect is listed here such as amount of credit, total amount payable, APR etc.. When it comes to interest tho it only says interest is calculated at 15% per annum and is applied on the date the agreement is signed. Surly if the loan is front loaded it would have to say in a legal term that the 1st payment covers only interest and then as payments continue you are paying less interest and more of the initial credit amount.
  • Create New...