Jump to content

Laura Thyme

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Laura Thyme

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. What days are you talking about? The Wild West? Because a punch in the face would have been considered assault even decades ago. I'd love to have shot a few bosses, or at least to have wrecked their offices and IT systems, but I knew that would be a criminal offence and I could end up with a record if not in prison, so I took them to the Tribunal instead. Got a small settlement in 2004 and a much better one in 2016. It does take time and patience though. I doubt you could use your age as mitigating circumstances when facing criminal charges for assault.
  2. Last year I booked a transatlantic return flight from Madrid with Iberia, on behalf of a friend of mine who moved to Madrid years ago. It was an expensive flight to start with and the email from Iberia stated that date changes would incur a penalty of between US $195 and $325. She changed the return date and was told over the phone that she had to pay over $500 to change the date. She argued about it but was given some stock answer by the local Iberia office so she had to pay the amount using her card. This is clearly not in accordance with what was stated on their booking confirmation email that stated: "Change Allowed with a penalty between 190-325 USD for departures from America, 150-250 € for departures from Europe" I believe BA and Iberia have merged https://www.britishairways.com/en-gb/information/about-ba/iag Is there anything that can be done?
  3. The reason we have MPs is so they act as our elected representatives. The Brexit referendum highlighted the fact that the average citizen is not in a position to make a decision of that kind simply because they don't have a full understanding of the issues involved. Some voted leave because of the promise of cash to the NHS, some because they thought it would curb immigration, others simply because their best mates were leavers. Nobody had any idea of what leaving the EU would actually involve, they still don't know it now. That's just one issue of many, and probably one of the least difficult to resolve. The economic and legal implications are enormous.
  4. I would say no, because the average citizen is not qualified to make a decision of that magnitude, and no-one was in full possession of the facts. Most people based their vote on their own little world and their perception of things. If they thought Polish builders were stealing their job, they'd vote leave, without any regard to the big picture. Similarly, many thought the money paid to the EU would go towards the NHS. Isn't it funny that there should have been so much talk about the NHS being overstretched just in time for the referendum? Also the referendum was intended for CaMoron to gain the vote of UKIPers and divert attention from all the devastating effects of his austerity program, WHO would have voted for yet more austerity? Only he focused on Europe and many were misled into thinking that immigration was the reason for austerity and that Brexit would put an end to it.
  5. Nobody knew what the outcome would be, not even those who put the question forward, it was a rather vague question which every voter interpreted in their own way. However, the young ones are more likely to be affected if they had plans to live, work and study abroad. A lot of the over 60s voted leave, if they were planning to retire in the sun they'd have done so by now, those still here don't have any plans to take advantage of EU free movement, that doesn't mean the younger ones wouldn't.
  6. So you think it's fair to "tolerate" (for want of a better word) illegal immigrants, asylum seekers, Muslims, etc. but EU citizens should be expelled, even when they all came here lawfully? That goes beyond discrimination and into "ethnic cleansing" territory. When you are talking about 17m people you have all sorts, some more ignorant than others. I started the thread to refer specifically to those who thought people who had been living here lawfully all their lives would be deported. The vote was for leaving the EU without providing any detail as to what that would involve. I think I've said this before, it was like asking you whether you'd like to stay in the UK or you'd rather emigrate to another country, without making any reference to what country or under which circumstances.
  7. Did you ever use 1and1 web hosting? They are quite bad at cancelling accounts and refer them to Arvato when you don't pay for something you cancelled six months ago.
  8. Six years for most debts. Overdrafts can be trickier to establish due to lack of set payment dates but this one was being paid via DMP so the six years would be from when the payments stopped, and run till the date when claim was issued. If the payments were returned they probably won't reset the clock. Once there's a CCJ, the debt never goes SBd although if no attempt is made to enforce within the first six years, they court may not allow the creditor to enforce it later. If CCJ is set aside defendant can defend the claim as if they'd received the claim form.
  9. True, not likely to resurrect it after 20 years but the question about SBd and proceedings was asked and had to be answered, for the benefit of all the others reading these boards.
  10. What they are saying is that, once you inform the creditor that the debt is statute barred and therefore you won't be paying it, they shouldn't keep harassing you over it, otherwise there would be little point in limitation if they can still keep firing threatening letters at you and ringing you. One thing to remember is that there is no record of SBd debts. Neither the creditors nor the courts will know when a debt has become SBd. Most debts get sold on, often to more than one debt purchaser, without all the account history, that's why, when you want to get copies of old statements, you send a SAR to the bank and not to Lowell, Cabot, etc. They wouldn't even know whether the debt is SBd or not. Also bear in mind how the court process works, proceedings are issued electronically and the court doesn't even verify the address of the defendant, let alone the authenticity of the debt, that's why there are so many default judgments against people who never received the court papers. Once the 14 days for acknowledgment of service are up, the claimant can request default judgment and the court only looks at the issue date of the claim, not the merits of the case. It is perfectly possible to get a CCJ for a SBd debt for the reasons above, only if you do, you can also apply for set aside on the grounds that it was SBd at the time the claim was issued. Debt purchasers issue claims for SBd debts every day, it's up to the defendant to submit a SBd defence and the onus then is on the claimant to show it is not. You wouldn't need your statements to show you haven't paid anything in 6 or 12 years, they would need to produce statements showing that you have. Some debt purchasers, notably Lowell, have gone as far as to make up phantom payments, it's also not unusual to credit the £1 CCA request fee to the account and then argue a £1 payment was made. If you had previously sent a SBd letter to the creditor and they still go and issue proceedings without providing any evidence to the contrary (that the debt is not SBd), it would be regarded as an abuse of process, but if there was no communication from the defendant, they couldn't be expected to have known it was SBd.
  11. Looks like I was right all along when I said people didn't know what they were voting for: http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-vote-regret-leave-margin-victory-2016-10 I rest my case.
  12. You've been watching Trump! It's common American usage to say someone's mad to mean angry. I posted the fuming smilies right below the worst comment of all. The anger was cumulative as they were all disgraceful, but that last one summed it all up.
  13. Actually, when you go to the website to write to your MP it does say that MPs cannot help with local authority government issues, only things to do with central government, such as the DWP. I wrote to mine about an issue with the DWP and got first class, super fast service so I can't complain. It may be different if you claim UC, because the housing element is also paid as part of your UC as opposed to separately by the LA.
  • Create New...