Unless you either want to pay more for your energy "on principle", or your energy supplier won't allow you to pay by direct debit, it works out about 6% cheaper to pay by DD.  It would seem odd not to want to...

Cut unfair direct debits - MoneySavingExpert

6 hours ago, Tommo1984 said:

 

I thought I’d explained what I was disputing

It’s not “silly buggers” … it’s ensuring that they adhere to their own guidelines when issuing an NIP. 

I have the right to question ALL evidence against me. “Equity at Arms”
They also need to carry out a dynamic risk assessment, which can be challenged (reasons I don’t need to go into)...

OK.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you actually mean equality of arms and that you aren't somebody whose been misled by FMOTL nonsense.

Equality of arms (an ECHR concept) basically refers to the conduct of a trial.  If you have so far only received a NIP/s172 request then you are nowhere near a trial yet.  

If you haven't reached the SJPN (or similar) stage yet then you don't really know what evidence the police have against you.  All you probabably have is a photo (taken from the front) to assist you in identifying the driver.  If you were actually caught speeding when travelling away from the detection device, I'm sure they'll have evidence which shows that and which they can produce in court.  But until you are actually charged with an offence, you aren't entitled to see the evidence against you, so you don't actually know yet what they have.

Have you received a SJPN yet or are you still at the NIP/s172 stage?

Unless you are confident that you could prove in court that the evidence against you does not show you were speeding, then I'm afraid you are in danger of playing "silly buggers" if the best straw you can clutch at is whether the evidence (which you haven't seen all of yet) shows you driving towards the device or away from it.

This man was playing silly buggers with his children's inheritance:  Man spends £30,000 fighting £100 speeding fine - BBC News

The time to dispute the evidence against you is when you know you've actually seen all the evidence that the prosecution seeks to rely on - not before.  If you aren't at the SJPN stage you don't yet know what that evidence is.

5 hours ago, Tommo1984 said:

Allegedly caught speeding. 38MPH in a 30MPH zone. by a radar gun I dispute this...

 

What are you disputing?

If you've recieved a NIP and a s172 request to identify the driver then you have to respond - otherwise you are probably committing a more serious offence than the alleged speeding...

Unless you have already been charged with the offence of speeding (your opening post is missing all relevant detail) you aren't entitled to see any evidence yet, and any photos the police may have supplied so far may only be there to help you identify the driver.  (Hence why they may have supplied images from the front of the car.)  If you haven't yet been charged you might find that they rely on other images to prosecute you.

Unless you are 100% confident that you are not guilty of the alleged speeding, it's probably best not to play silly buggers about whether the images are from in front or from behind...

I can only agree with what @Ethel Street has said in #2 and #4.

If you are dealing with issues about the ownership of a house you really need to seek professional paid for legal advice and not attempt some sort of DIY job.  If you already have a solicitor acting for you, why on earth are you asking for advice on an anonymous forum?  You're paying them to advise you.  (I appreciate that this thread isn't specifically asking about ownership but about registering some sort of objection at the Land Registry, but it amounts to the same thing...)

Like @Ethel Street I'm not a lawyer, but I do know a little bit...

21 hours ago, purplemushroomfairy said:

... My Mum died in 2003 leaving her share of the home to myself and my sister . Her will also allowed my step father to live in the house until he died . He moved in with his girlfriend three months after Mum was buried . My sister and I were not advised of our legal rights . 

He died a couple of weeks ago - we do not have good relations with step siblings . 

It appears that in 2016 he applied to have Mum removed from title deeds - she did have a beneficial interest - I think my sister and I should have been added after her death but as we had to get the will through probate there was no help ...

When you say that your mum "left her share of the home" to you and your sister, are you sure that she had a share to leave you in the first place?  She would only have had a share in the house if she and your step-dad owned it together as tenants in common, in which case she could leave her share to whoever she liked (eg you and your sister).  But many homes in the UK are owned by husband and wife as joint tenants, in which case when one spouse dies their "share" automatically goes to the surviving spouse, and can't be left to anyone else.

So do you know if your mum and step-dad owned the house jointly or as tenants in common?

You really need proper legal advice.

So what you are saying is that Amazon's own tracking information - while you still had access to it - would be consistent with the items never being delivered to the hub in the first place, and that the items appear to have been identified as being damaged and seem to have been returned to Amazon with no involvement at all from you?

Assuming the alternative - ie that the items had been correctly delivered to the hub - how would you have collected them?  How would you have identified yourself?  Could a third party have impersonated you or intercepted the items?

6 hours ago, ryanwheels said:

William - thank you for your advise here 

It's an Amazon counter, they have said its a locker in their letter - nothing was sent to a locker.

They all went to a counter where someone has physically received the item who worked in the shop

But I thought that your amazon account - you showed a screenshot earlier which said of the items - and I quote directly - that "It can't be delivered".

To me "It can't be delivered" means it would never have been delivered to the hub, but above you seem to be saying that somebody at the hub actually received them.

I think it would be helpful if you could explain to us what facts you know for sure, and what "facts" you are only speculating about...

For example, do you know if the items ever reached the delivery hub - or do you have no idea at all what happened?

50 minutes ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

... What is strange, is that a refund was requested only 1 day after the items were delivered to the hub store.

If the allegation is that someone at the hub store has stolen the items, then go to the Police, report the thefts and get crime reference numbers.

If you are willing to make statements to Police, perhaps you may be believed. As the consequences of making false statements to Police would be a serious offence.

I don't think* the OP is suggesting that anybody at the hub has done anything.  I think* he's suggesting that the items never even reached the hub because they were marked by the courier as damaged and not deliverable, and supposedly returned to Amazon by the courier** before they even reached the hub...

* I say "think" because the OP's story is so muddled, confusing and difficult to follow that I don't really know what he's saying.  And that's after 40 posts on a second thread on this matter...

** Whether the OP is accusing the courier of something is equally unclear...

3 hours ago, ryanwheels said:

 

- This happened a 2 times on more than one account        

"more than one account"?  How many would that be then?

3 hours ago, ryanwheels said:

 

- Other people received same email (2 others)

 

How would you know what other people have received?

2 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

I think one question from your last thread is whether you still have any of the computers. 

HB

Presumably the answer to this question is "No.  They were all returned to Amazon"?

If your "friend" and his dad don't stop messing about trying to avoid a piddling speeding fine they might both end up like these two...

Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce jailed for eight months

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

Former cabinet minister Chris Huhne and his ex-wife Vicky Pryce are each jailed for eight months for perverting the course of justice over a driving...

2 hours ago, FTMDave said:

 

.... I've just checked my account and the money was refunded yesterday!

So unless there is some last-minute twist I think this can be marked as a win!

Thanks to Ethel, dx, BankFodder, Andy & FruitSalad for the advice.  FruitSalad is on my "must send a postcard to from Uzbekistan" list!

@FTMDave  -  you need to remember that RailwayUz have up to 45(?) days to challenge the bank's decision to award you a chargeback.  

Of course they may not know or may not understand that...

3 hours ago, snowdragon said:

I understand that HB, sorry,  just wanted to PM Manxman and DX asked me to resend a PM

Unfortunately this forum won't let me send or receive PMs...

So this WAS a business transaction and you are not a consumer?

If you are "in business" I'd suggest you seek legal advice - depending on the value of the loss, of course.

Otherwise you need to examine the T&Cs of both your agreement with your agent and his agreement with the warehouse...

[Edit - just for illustration, this is the definition of "consumer" in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk)

“Consumer” means an individual acting for purposes that are wholly or mainly outside that individual’s trade, business, craft or profession ]

Perhaps you ought to check what the T&Cs of your agreement with your import agent say?  And ask your agent what he arranged on your behalf with the warehouse?

Depending on whether you're a business and on the value of the stock, you might want to seek paid for professional legal advice.  If you are a business you are basically free to agree to whatever contractual terms you like, and you are expected to be capable of looking after your own interests. You don't have the benefit of consumer law to protect you.

Not in a union then?

Does your employer have  a HR dept?

So you don't have a contract with the warehouse?  Your intermediary does?

Well that might put a slightly different complexion on it... (?)

So your contractor hasn't received any payment yet.  Has he contacted you regarding payment?

I don't know, but I'm not sure you can make a s75 claim if your card company hasn't paid the contractor yet.  My understanding - which may be wrong - is that s75 depends on the card company being the creditor in the debtor - creditor - supplier chain.  If the card company haven't paid the contractor yet I'm not sure if you have a s75 claim because I'm not sure JAJA are a creditor in these circumstances(?).

I'm wondering if you may have jumped the gun by asking JAJA to hold the payment...   Did you ask them to hold it or what?

I think what would normally happen is that you would have made a credit card payment to the contractor, you would then have tried to recover it from him, and if that failed you would pursue a s75 claim against your card provider.  Or you might have sued them jointly from the get go.  But that hasn't happened here.

Also, what about BankFodder's question about the cost of making good?  Normally you'd be suing the contractor and then making a s75 claim if he didn't pay up.  What I'm really not certain about here is what level of involvement JAJA have if they haven't paid the contractor at all and might not be a creditor(?).

See what @BankFodder suggests as I'm a bit puzzled in this situation

18 hours ago, snowdragon said:

no reply to previous posts but  can anyone tell me when someone makes a statement for court  is it just to do with the facts they saw/heard on day in question or would it include stuff from say, weeks , months, ago, whether told or heard? 

Sorry - but how has it reached "statement" stage?

Originally you said your friend "was asked by police" about something or someone.  Has she actually made a witness statement for use in court, or has she been asked to make one?

If she's making a formal statement to the police that might be used in court proceedings, it can relate to anything that she directly knows (eg that she saw or heard) about the matter that is before the court.  Although that doesn't necessarily mean it will be admissible in court.

If your friend makes (or has made) a witness statement that ends up being used in court, I'd have thought her identity would become known when it was given in evidence.  I don't know that for a fact but I can't imagine you can give a formal court statement anonymously.

Has your friend followed previous advice to try to speak to a social worker or to a police family liaison officer in order to air her concerns and seek reassurance?  And perhaps ask for protection?

(I understand that you can't go into detail on a public forum - and I don't want to know anyway - but without knowing the background to this it's very difficult to give useful advice.  Good luck to you and your friend)

I would say that in the case of JL* and Richer Sounds their TV guarantees/warranties generally offer better protection than CRA.  (As I would suggest is the case here...)

* Although I understand JL are looking at changing their guarantee terms and they may not be so generous in the future.

1 hour ago, rizel23 said:

Currently we have paid nothing for the works so currently nothing to reclaim back, if that changes we will review options thanks 

I thought you'd paid 50% (£2150?) on your credit card as a deposit?  Isn't that what you're claiming back from JAJA?

It doesn't answer why you aren't first taking action against the contractor...

Make a complaint | Independent Office for Police Conduct

I'd also make a complaint to your local Police and Crime Commissioner.  (They won't interfere in police "operational" matters but you could complain that the police appear to be operating a policy of ignoring what are clearly criminal offences on the spurious grounds that they are "domestic" differences.)

12 hours ago, newmoses said:

... Therefore, can the manager demand the bodycams are on all through our shift? And can the manager trawl through the footage from previous days?.

 

 The bodycams are there for the protection and safety of the staff but it seems the manager is using them to spy on the staff/Is this legal?.

 

I suspect the bodycams are there for the legal protection of your employer just as much as for your protection and safety.

I don't know what job you do but I can envisage some jobs (eg bouncer, security staff) where your employer - and you - might heve to rely on uninterrupted footage for legal defence reasons.  (eg you are a bouncer and you and your employer are being sued because you allegedly assaulted someone.).

Obviously there are good reasons for switching it off (see @whitelist's post) but if your employer requires you to wear a bodycam then I think it would be a good idea to clarify exactly what your employer requires and exaxtly when you can and cannot turn it off.  (And if you are in a union - which I hope you are - ask for their input too).

My point was that s75 specifically makes "the creditor" liable in what is referred to as the "debtor - creditor - supplier" chain.

You are the debtor.  Your contractor is the supplier.  I'm not sure whether the creditor is JAJA or Visa or Mastercard.  If it isn't JAJA they might have to comply with whatever instructions they have from Visa/Mastercard in respect of paying out on s75 claims.

Usually you just make a claim against your bank and - if successful - they pay up.  Because I've never heard of JAJA and I don't know under what authority they issue credit cards I'm just saying I don't know who the creditor is.  It might be a complication - or it might not...

Just as I haven't heard of JAJA they appear not to have heard of s75.

I think you may need to spell it out to them in words of one syllable that your claim is for breach of contract in that your contractor deliberately didn't follow the agreed contract specification and installed something that - in effect - you did not contract to buy.  Nothing to do with industry standards or building regs.  They simply departed from the agreed specification without your agreement.

Have you asked for the claim to be escalated to somebody who might know what they are doing?

As I posted earlier, see what else @BankFodder suggests.  They're better than me at untangling these sort of disputes.

Thanks.  Never heard of them.  Wonder if they know what a s75 claim is?

(Which is borne out by their earlier statement that they would prosecute the trader!    )

Just wondering whether there may be an issue regarding who the creditor is for the purposes of s75?  Is it JAJA or is it the card provider (Visa or Mastercard)?

Perhaps JAJA have to prove to Visa or Mastercard that the claim is good...?

11 hours ago, dx100uk said:

pretty sure if anyone (other than direct children or grand children) mentioned in a will predeceases the will writer it does not go to their existing wife nor children, it goes back in the pot and is split between those already mentioned pro rata in the will.??

Sorry!  To clarify further, if the gift does fail because the dead beneficiary had no children, then yes, it goes back into the residual estate to be distributed as per the will.  So the OP might get something out of that depending on what the will says

It can get complicated...

1 hour ago, Ethel Street said:

 

 

It's best to check these things. Not everyone asking for advice has the familiarity with the legal construction of Wills that some regular posters have. And it's useful for other people reading the thread in the future to be aware of the issue.

Very true.  I think from #6 the OP is going to investigate further.