email on its way Tony

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CGUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nhs.uk%2Fcarersdirect%2Fguide%2Fkinds%2Fpages%2Fdementia-intro.aspx&ei=GN_sT6aSA4fm8QPd0sWbDQ&usg=AFQjCNE44LKtTM4_TuThCqKz7ztVr5Zhkw&sig2=bYrRlC1SsnzfvUbMsTLtQg

any more news on this ?

ive got my father in law in one in llandudno , this is his sixth one , we are at odds with the Council who are now evaluating his property with a view to making us sell his property , makes you sick just the thought he paid tax all his life never had a day of work , and during the war years he was in the RAF went to africa during the campaigns in africa aginst rommels lot , so he paid his dues and yet the council say we are trying to deprive them of assets , he signed the property over when he was in hospital due to a broken leg this happened when we were on holiday and we would ring him every day to make sure he was coping but when we got no answer one day i said to the wife i will go home and make sure everything was ok , well the wife got a freind the next day to call round to check on him , he was lying on the floor and had been their for two days helpless, he was suffering from dehydration as well and this in turn brought on his memory loss which has since become vascular dementure its been three years since the hospitalisation and now he does not even know his daughter or son , but at 93 i am geussing this is normal , but the point i make here is gwynedd council are the worst for snatching properties and their is no help , by the way you are entitled to 12 weeks respite and a further 12 months care home entitlement , ps the reason he has been in six homes is because he was using his walking stick to find his way around or to get peoples attention they classed him in all the homes as dangerous and violent and abusive, we know for a fact he has never in his life swore and never lifted his hands in agression at any time ,he is almost blind hence the use of his walking stick , but now he no longer has this he is on the zimmer now but even with this he struggles , it is sad to se such swift deterioration in what he was a very proud man , i watched tv today honoring the RAF well some honor when the councils want to snatch his property BOMBER COMMAND dont make me laugh it is all fake and just a show from the government pretending they really care ,just makes me angry

i cannot really help with your problem , but my daughter experienced similar when she was at uni in Preston , but i am sure someone can help

yes i thought that as well

my son in law has been asked to attend a work program 25 miles from his home ,he already pays top up rent to his flat they have just had a baby yet this work program is unpaid and he has to pay for his own travel ? is this right ,he would nt be able to afford to feed his child and pay top up fees towards his accomadation , what can he do patrickq1

this was my thoughts a couple of years ago when i first came on ,the document i have see so far do not look entirely Cosha ,so much so it would take a Expert in Contracts to evaluate these peices of paper they have been producing ,so come on guys get those documents checked over patrickq1 have not been on for almost a year ill health and other little niggly things kept me of so will go through the thread again

need help to start the court action , ie.. what forms do i need to get to begin the action patrickq1

yes chilli is and has been trying same as yourself, i gestimate over ten thousand people have suffered under MX and Northern Rock will now be going through the same , the first point is the appointment of these "Receivers" who are detrimental to your case, being that their sole duty is to MX and the Like ,they have no concern about your abilities to recover as far as they are concerned they are a profit driven company who need to prove that the "Ends meet the Needs" of what is required by MX who in turn have to show figures to UKAR who in turn need to show UKFI so all in all each company take a cut of the procceeds ,proving that this is not a profitable venture for the UK Treasury , this has not yet been pointed out to the UK Treasury Ministers that it is a complete loss making industry and saay out of every £10,000 collected the treasury will receive less than £2000. ,this is not only a loss to the Goverment it then compounds your loss and you will ultimately be footing the bill for these Scavengers or Carpetbaggers , who thrive on your misery , i am writing again to another source for it to be evaluated in depth and when you chat with Chilli and others on this thread you will see you are not the only one , i think it is getting close to the time when something needs to be done to burst this little inner circle of Scavengers and make them wholly accountable for the losses created under their own mis management and greed on the part of the Receivers who are in a position to profit for themselves only ... patrickq1

i forgot to mention i do not use this free voip never have used it in all the years its been available patrickq1

i need to take court action now as i cannot afford to wait for a further 9 months 26.95 for a service that promises 20megs and i only get 4.5 meg for a service that promises uploads of 2 meg i only get 0.60 for a service that promises the new broadband receiver which i have not received for a service that is now frequently cutting out loss of service only started 3 months ago all in all i am paying for a sub standard service so i need to begine court action now ,i will worry about everything else afterwards because i can go elsewhere and still keep my phone line through the post office ... thanks for your input , locotus patrickq1

bump

http://publicappointmentscommissioner.independent.gov.uk/Publications/publication,d60743aab4b.html see above link complaints forms are in the link

in reply to your plight Steve i am sure you are aware that MX will lie to their backteeth that they will do this and in reality they will do the opposite , so whatever they say do not beleive it, once it is put into the hands of the receiver they are now transferring their obligations and rights to deal with your business the receiver now has absolute control of your account and the only thing you can do in these circummstances is prosecute the receiver and using MX as your Witness who in turn will become a Hostile witness , this should further your action and try to get the courts to suspend the receivers from any further actions until a full court hearing because regardless of court action the receiver will do his upmost to make a bad case against you and also they wish to profit from repairs and other actions etc in order to weaken your ability to act against them, MX dont just hand over accounts they hand them over and claim they did ask the receivers to hold fire whilst talks are ongoing so i know you are aware that this will not be the case the receivers will now take a couple of weeks and then act against you , it all designed confusion and they know that within a month the receivers will have started to to the business agaainst you and in the meantime they will delay in replying to you, only court action can stop the receivers but you really need legal advice and all of you need to find a Barristor in order to begin a Class Action , but also see my thread above and write to Sir Norman and see if that helps . to be able to show the proof of loss to the treasury is what UKAR and UKFI dont want

the OFT are awaiting complaints in volume from all MX customers i have also contacted this e mail address [email protected] for the PERSONAL ATTENTION OF for the personal attention of Sir David Normington, GCB‏ this is the official channel for the complaints about MX this is not the OFT, but the regulator who overseas goverment departments such as UKAR who contract out services to UK Financial Investments Limited (UKFI) manages HM Treasury’s 100% shareholding in UKAR Limited. now this guy overseas that UKAR are acting responsibly and fairly ,i have explained to him that MX are abusing Customers and causing untold losses and practicly forcing bankruptcies to Landlords thus creating huge losses to the Treasury and also i explained the ignorance and refusal to act against MX by UKAR who are and have been made aware of the actions by MX , he awaits your complaints ,but you will have to email and explain just what MX are doing and also back this up with statements that you have made complaints to UKAR who have possibly ignored your please ...this is best i can do at the moment , but i am sure an explaination that these companies are causing huge losses to the UK Treasury i feel it may help.. patrickq1

OK got all my data from BT and they are not backing down they are now charging me the fee for the broadband 26.95 per month for bt broadband option 3 i now need to know what procedures i should take i which should i be applying for in court forms ,as the regulator states above ,From a civil point of view, if after reading through the terms and conditions of your contract with British Telecom (BT), you can provide reasonable argument that BT are failing to perform or comply with those terms and conditions, you could look to hold BT in breach of contract and pursue them for an amount of damages that would directly reflect any losses you have incurred as a consequence i.e. a partial refund of any amounts already paid. In addition, you could pursue BT for 'loss of bargain' if they refuse to provide the service at the agreed price. When seeking 'loss of bargain' you would be looking to recover any extra charges you might incur in buying the same service elsewhere. In practical terms this can be difficult, as you would have to prove you have found exactly the same service for the best possible price. However it could be used as a lever to negotiate with the trader, in order to obtain a form of redress you are willing to accept.so i need to know which claim forms i am to apply for patrickq1 ps trading standards never got in touch with me ? as stated in the regulators letter above s

and to report how the charges are made up what method of accounting they have used think you could add this question , Wp

i will go through my stuff i think i still have some letters and also still have the card that a delivery company called when it was supposed to have delivered a package ,it was sent by hfo who had registered a fake delivery company at that time ,the fake delivery is also or was registered on the HFO accounts , so i will try to find the correspondance patrickq1

who was this solicitor that was their representing hfo ? by the sounds of things this judge needs to be questioned about his behaviour , he the Solicitor didnt happen to be in the judges chambers before you got to court did he took the following transcrpt from P1 thread cputr... perhaps donkey can revise it and send it to both alice and this other solicitor "In light of the complete absence of any enforceable documentation, I am concerned over xxxxxx'x persistent attempts to pursue payment on an unsubstantiated debt in defiance of OFT guidelines and the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008 by now passing “instructions” and personal data to yourselves. According to your letter these are in fact instructions from instructions, from your client’s clients, leaving me to assume that neither your client nor your client’s clients have actually informed you of the facts surrounding the unsubstantiated debt that they have instructed you to pursue and it’s current legal unenforceability under The Consumer Credit Act 1974; sec 127 (3). I have also assumed that your clients have also failed to mention my recent request for confirmation under CPUTR (2008) on xx/xx/xx either; a request that remains outstanding to this day due to the reluctance of your clients to provide an answer one way or the other. Under the circumstances, should you now decide to accept “instructions” from your client or your client’s clients in the continued absence of any enforceable documentation from anyone at all and/or fail to confirm upon request whether you, your client (xxxxxxxx) or your client’s clients (xxxxxxxxx) currently hold or have ever held a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement (Consumer Credit Act, 1974) in your/their possession under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008, then you, your clients and your client’s clients will be falling foul of ss.5(2), 3(b), 6 and 7, their actions/activities will be added to existing complaints and your company will be reported to the Solicitors’ Regulatory Authority without any further notice. It would appear that xxxxxxxxx have already breached CPUTR (2008) anyway by failing to confirm or deny their possession of such an Agreement when requested to do so on xx/xx/xx (by recorded delivery) and passing “instructions” to you regardless. Please therefore take note that this letter serves as an additional formal request under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR, 2008) for written confirmation as to whether xxxxxxx (solicitors), xxxxxxxxxxx, and/or xxxxxxxxxx currently hold or have ever held a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement in your/their possession pertaining to myself and if not, to kindly confirm so in writing".

i would be very suprised if the halifax do not have the origional agreement , they are reknowned for storing documents as far back as 1925 for a vast majority of properties throughout the uk so i would be cautious about them not having the agreement , sor ry i have not followed this thread so i am unclear what the document is , have you tried Halifax with a sar ? patrickq1

did you have any proof of contacting them during the initial stages ,phone calls are recorded by BT so you need firstly to send a SAR request ,to include all transcripts of phone conversations with BT , this will show up for what you have said is true, but SAR them first and foremost then come here and let us know they have 40 days to reply back patrickq1

Lady Di DI seems to be floging hersen all over shop lol

not had a great deal of time just lately but i found this concerning arbitration , mispelled i know , http://www.snrdenton.com/news__insights/alerts/2011-09-15-arbitration-rules.aspx patrickq1

hi i am suprised no one has helped on here or has this complaint gone dead ? patrickq1