Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by rosiecotton

  1. I'm not able to foster as I am in rented accommodation and don't have a spare room anyway - I suppose that could be their argument though. Have babysat, but not for any period of time - just evenings etc.
  2. It was an administrator who emailed me. I had asked whether the requirement was to actually be a parent yourself, or if substantial work with children/families would be considered, and explained my circumstances. The response, basically, was: "The criteria of parenting experience relates to the role of 24 hour care of children over a period of time, so unfortunately working with children and families does not fit into this category" I still do not see anything in the job advert (there is no JD attached) which suggests that this is really necessary
  3. Hi guys I am in the jobs market at the moment following redundancy in March. I have been working with children and teenagers in various roles - currently doing some temporary work at a special educational needs school working with the youngest children (3 - 6), and also voluntary evening youth work. In a previous career (before my career change) I worked closely with project and people management and partnership working, in a professional role. I have seen a job advertised, title "Organiser". The advert reads: XXX is a voluntary organisation committed to promoting the welfar
  4. All well and good saying parents should do it, but plenty of parents don't have a clue themselves. E-ngage Live The resources are out there, and I am sure most schools do bring it in as part of the Citizenship curriculum in one way or another. Talkingshop works well, unfortunately it's sometimes difficult to get schools on board because the teachers are under a lot of pressure and have all sorts thrown at them to wade through.
  5. Just wish someone had explained to me what was going to happen back in May when I went bankrupt! Going to call the OR, I can pay them £300 at the moment but no more than that, as that's pretty much all I have in my account at the moment after the bills have come out.
  6. Hello, I went bankrupt back in May. This month I noticed on my pay slip that there was no income tax taken out of the salary. I'd thought last month that my pay was too much, but I knew I was due a back payment so didn't think anything of it - then when it was the same this month, I checked in more detail. This has only been for the last two months, before that tax was taken as normal. I have signed the Receiver's form to say they can take the tax directly from my account. I knew to expect this, and assumed it was happening. So that means I have spent about £250 last mon
  7. I don't know what you mean by "tied contract" but you may be referring to Gyzmo's post quoted below, which to me is quite clear: To see this in legal terms I quote directly from the Sale of Goods Act: linky here: Sale of Goods Act 1979 I don't wish to become further embroiled in this mess of a thread, but I did feel the need to at least point that out, since your use of the word "lawyers" was slightly patronising. Incidentally, neither myself or Gyzmo have claimed to be lawyers.
  8. I was made bankrupt today with personal debts of £24k following a brief marriage and divorce. Obviously my account has been frozen. I need an account to have my salary paid into and my bills paid out from, so I guess that I will now have to start looking for someone who can offer me a basic bank account with basic facilities like a debit card and direct debits. My creditors in the bankruptcy were Halifax, Nationwide and Lloyds TSB. Can anyone recommend a bank which might be sympathetic to my circumstances and offer me somewhere to have my wages paid in? I understand the Co
  9. Provided they are sending it back to the manufacturer, though, they would be adhering to the law. If they were actively promoting a policy which attempted to restrict customers' statutory rights, then the Home Authority Trading Standards department for that company would be able to advise their Head Office. TS can't enforce individual civil cases but they can certainly advise traders who are getting it wrong.
  10. READ what I said. I am qualified in this field. I have specific professional qualifications in consumer civil law. And real world experience - isn't four years (and counting) working in that exact job real world experience? I actually mediate and assist in court cases so I am sure I have seen more than you have. Judges aren't consumer civil law experts. They base their decisions on reading up they have done before the case in front of them, as they have to deal with many varied cases and they can't be a master of all the law that they need to consider. Many have made cock-eyed d
  11. I am not going to correct you yet again on your knowledge of the law, I have done so too many times already. However since you have made this personal, I am fully qualified in this field and have worked professionally in civil advice and intervention for over four years. Yes, my livelihood depends on my legal knowledge. The reason I put a disclaimer on my posts is because I am giving advice off my own bat here, independent from my work, and am therefore not covered by my employer's insurance. I am certainly not admitting my advice isn't "proper" as I know I know what I am talking a
  12. Holy Mary mother of God :o I *think* that might be the best one yet. These posts should really come with a warning, they are so wrong it's unbelievable.
  13. Just to add, I agree with everything Gyzmo has said above.
  14. Blacksheep and Blitz are correct. As you bought the car privately, you have no claim regarding the quality of the car. Manufacturers are only ever liable for any warranty they may choose to give, and they can set any terms and conditions they wish within that warranty. Your statutory rights are always against the retailer, but your rights regarding quality ONLY apply to trader sales and not if you buy from private individuals. Sorry.
  15. The small claims court is a very fair process. The judge will always try and view the parties on equal terms. So this means even if the other party turns up with a top QC barrister and you are representing yourself, the judge will allow for this and realise that the parties are imbalanced, and do what he can to redress this balance. Most people tend to represent themselves in small claims cases (armed with plenty of advice beforehand) because this court does not generally award solicitor's fees. You CAN do it yourself, many have - just make sure you are well prepared and informed befor
  16. Some retailers are actually very good Retailpointofview/yourbestfriend is not one of them.
  17. He keeps saying "read SoGA" on here, but doesn't seem to follow his own advice. There is NO set date by which the consumer loses the right to a refund. The law says they can reject for a full refund "within a reasonable time". Never mind this 28 days, 14 days stuff. Yes, past cases have suggested that 28 days may indeed be a reasonable time in pretty standard faulty goods cases, but ultimately it's down to a judge and not set in stone. Incidentally I'm also fully qualified in consumer law and have worked in the field for four years so far, so I also don't need to be told to "read S
  18. That's an interesting point of view and not something that has ever come up in my training or my job. I would imagine that your rights will continue from the original contract of sale (i.e. the six years would not start over again once the goods were replaced) so therefore there would still have been consideration. That's my initial thought on the matter. I can't check this out at the moment but will run it past a few people when I can. Incidentally what I was taught (a few years ago now) was that if there was no consideration, the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act would apply
  19. It would still be the SoGA, but the amended Act to account for the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations which amended the main Act on 31 March 2003.
  20. OK, sorry I should have stressed - since it's a credit agreement it's the Sale of Goods Act and not the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act. The dates seem wrong too - I assume you notified them on 14th April, not March, since the car was bought on 27th March. I feel 7 days is also a fairly short time, you may wish to give them a bit longer to respond to show you are being reasonable. Let me know what their response is and go from there.
  21. Of course, link it up here and I'll have a look. All cars that they sell (or hire) should be roadworthy and safe. If you have reasonable doubts about cars on his forecourt, I would report this to Trading Standards as they are the body who would investigate the safety of cars for sale under the Road Traffic Act.
  22. The consumer has to give the trader a reasonable opportunity to put the faults right first, however. The court will look to see if the consumer has done so.
  23. Then you can claim from both the finance company and the garage The garage are liable under the Sale of Goods Act for the quality and fitness for purpose of the goods (as before), if you wish to reject I would do so as soon as you possibly can, in writing, to the garage. Copy the letter to the finance company with a covering letter stating that you are holding them equally liable for the faulty goods under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act.
  • Create New...