Hi, at the end of March my elderly parents (85 & 80) visited a caravan show. They saw a mini camper van for sale and my father was quite interested. He had a vision of being able to use it to take my mother, who has terminal cancer for days out. The van was on sale for £23,999. My parents looked around the rest of the show and on their way back as they were approaching the stand were they saw the above mentioned van the salesman had sign with a reduced price of £19,995. In parents words "he told us he was reducing it for the show" My father was attracted by this and signed up to purchase the vehicle and paid a deposit. They did not really have a proper look around the vehicle and salesman didn't offer to show them any of the features or how things worked. The van was on display with the beds made up so my father didn't even have an opportunity to sit in the vehicle. Both my parents need the aid of a stick to walk. Originally my father agreed to part ex his caravan but later decided to withdraw this as he felt he could get a better price. As the vehicle was un-registered the company selling insisted that the balance was paid before it could be registered. My father paid the balance and waited to hear from them. Communication from the company has been poor from the outset. Eventually they confirmed a date for the delivery of Friday 8th May. On the day of the delivery my father had a telephone message to say that they could not deliver because they had not received all the paperwork back from the DVLA. My father contacted the seller and left a message to say that if they planned to deliver the following week he would not be available Tue - Thurs as he had to take my mother to hospital each day. By the following Thurs (14th) he had not heard anything so with his permission I contacted the salesman to find out what was happening. Everything was now in place so a date of 21st May was agreed for delivery. The van was delivered and immediately on inspection my parents & sister noticed a number of defects, scratches, rust etc. On the sales document the vehicle was ticked as being new. Other things transpired that they were not aware of such as the fact that the engine was under the drivers seat. The procedure for elevating the roof very complicated. During discussion with the salesman it was claimed that the vehicle was sold as a demonstration model, something that my father claims not to have been made aware of at the time of sale. On the basis of the defects found my father rejected the van and it was taken back to their premises. After taking advice from Citizens Advise we wrote to them claiming that under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 the vehicle was not as described and not of acceptable quality and demanded a refund of the full amount paid. My father received a very angry response this week claiming that the vehicle was clearly marked as a demonstration model. It suggested that we had accused them of high pressure selling tactics - this has never been claimed in any communication with them. It also claimed that the defects found were minor and that the vehicle is of acceptable quality & fit for purpose. As a gesture of goodwill they have rectified the faults and they are asking him to make arrangements to collect the vehicle. Advise from CAB is that we write back and say we are not satisfied with their reply but I don't know were this will get us. Could we have any claim to cancel the contract under the "off premises contract" regulations? Sorry this is a bit long winded but any help will be most appreciated as this is causing the whole family a lot of stress with both my parents being ill with cancer. thanks

I can never understand why people stress about some prisoners being able to vote. If we want them to be rehabilitated, then why not give them the right to vote towards the end of their sentence. The ECHR have only said some prisoners should be able to vote and this is being used by some to justify the UK withdrawing from ECHR. Does not make any sense to me. We have enough problems getting people to vote !

I am a secure tenant of a social housing landlord in Scotland and have been so for fifteen years, at the same address throughout. I am the sole tenant, I do not sub-let or keep lodger(s), however for the last three plus years I have allowed a friend to stay with me in the property as my "guest" (for want of a more appororiate term), and it has been their sole and only home throughout that period. The landlord has been aware of their presence at the address throughout, and has not objected or attempted to have them removed. Following almost three years of a difficult and steadily deteriorating relationship between myself and the landlord, relating to other matters unrelated to my co-habitee, my landlord has now served a summons for eviction on me. I'm disputing it in court on the ground of the landlords unreasonable expectations and demands, but quite frankly only rather half-heartedly as I realise and accept that even if I win, our tenant/landlord relationship is untenanble in anything more than the very short term on account of our various difficulties over the last three years. Essentially I'm none to bothered whether I win or lose, as I'm going to have to move on sooner rather than later anyway, and while I'd rather have a bit more time and wait until circumstances were somewhat better to move on, if I have to make do with what alternative accomodation I can arrange right now, so be it. My co-habitee's situation is however rather different. Having been a resident at the address for three years and known to the landlord as such throughout that period, I am given to understand they have the status of a "qualifying occupier", and as such have a right under legislation for the Court to be taken in to consideration upon what the impact would be on them should an eviction of the tenant be granted. How I, or my co-habitee goes about making the Court aware of their circumstances and the impact of my eviction on them as a resident at my address is where my questions lie, as obtaining information on this seems almost impossible to locate. So far we have been led to believe that for their interests to be considered by the Court, they need to apply to be "sisted" to the Summons - however the flip side of being sisted, or at least one of them, is that they, at the Sheriff's discretion can then be made liable for some/all?? of the sum of money my landlord is seeking in connection with my eviction. Is this the only "down" side (for them) in being "sisted" to the summons, or are there other potential negative issues? Is it absolutely necessary that they be "sisted" for them to be able to address/inform the Court of how they will be affected by granting my eviction - To me anyway, it seems strange that the legislation appears to say that the Court is obliged to consider them anyway, that they need to be pro-active in making sure the information for the Court to be able to do so is in front of the Court, and, have to run the risk of being held responsible for a monetary sum, when in effect they are an innocent and uninvolved party who just happens to going to be losing out whatever happens , in a dispute between a landlord and tenant.

I have been an ebay customer and seller for 13 years . my feedback is 100% positive and my rating is "above average " . I generally auction training shoes purchased locally then auctioned on. I have been doing this for many years . Without warning Ebay have removed my listings and stated that I have violated Ebay Policy . they have refused to tell me what Policy I have violated . I have read through every policy and provided clear evidence in my defence for each area . Their response was that there is no appeal, they would not clarify what area I have breached and that my seller account was suspended. I suspect that I have been subject to a malicious complaint but cannot defend myself in any way shape or form. Has anyone else experienced this ? The treatment I have had from Ebay has been nothing short of disgraceful

I normally lurk around the debt forums and so not sure if this is to place to post, if not my apologies and perhaps a mod could move. Would like some advice about my rights in connection with a fault with an Audi A6 2006 I have recently purchased from Quicks (now Evans Halshaw) When I test drove the vehicle I noticed the radio would not switch off or mute and had to be silenced using the rotary volume control, however, given the dash of the car is like an aeroplane cockpit I assumed I was doing something wrong and been otherwise happy with the vehicle I purchased it for cash price near enough £7,000. Having used the car for 3 or 4 days and reading the handbook it became obvious that the on/off/mute button for the radio was in fact not working, I telephoned the dealer and made arrangements to return the vehicle for them to look at. Having checked the vehicle over I was informed that a) the radio fitted to the car does not turn off and the fact that the mute function does not work is irrelevant as the sound can be turned down using the rotary control! Now I have a problem with this on 2 counts firstly having taken the vehicle to an Audi main dealer the claim that the radio does not switch off is a lie and secondly having just handed over 7 grand of my hard earned for a car if it is fitted with a mute switch I expect it to work. Additionally I am annoyed by the attitude of the dealer which has changed from this vehicle is an outstanding example hence the top end asking price to more or less what do you expect from a 2006 car. I would be grateful for any advice for instance if I pursue this further is it possible that a court would consider the dealers claim correct i.e. it is a relatively minor fault which I should expect on a car of that age? Many thanks Nosnibor

About 7 years ago I started work with my employer (a college) on a part time (0.5) but permanent contract. Very soon additional work became available on the same course I was teaching on, which I was offered on an hourly paid basis. This had a separate contract but I still had one pay code and one pay slip. Since then this mix has continued and I have argued on many occasions that the hourly paid work be turned into an increase in my part time position but to no avail. Recently the matter has come to a head as the employer wishes to appoint another 0.5 to teach on the course, which will probably mean a loss of my additional hourly paid work. Does anybody know what my rights are under UK employment law?

Hello CAG, Sorry if this is in the wrong forum, please feel free to move if incorrect. Long time lurker, only ever posted once before (against NCP - and won!!), just hoping someone can give me some helpful advise on an issue I now have. purchased a Sony TV from Tesco in April 2012. It had a Tesco 1 year warranty and also has a manufacturers 1 year warranty as well. No issues until now, but this weekend turned it on, and there are lines across the screen (horizontal), happens on all inputs/channels, checked cables etc etc, definitely the TV. Not impressed because I paid the extra for the 'name' and I thought I was making a bit of investment rather than paying less for a cheaper model. Phoned Sony and got through to some rude woman in Egypt?! who said go away. I then spoke to a guy at Sony in Scotland who was helpful, but they said being as it was after the manufactures warranty had expired there is nothing they are prepared to do, and the cost of repair would probably be more than actually buying a new TV. To me, a TV should last a lot longer than 2 years 8 months.. ie without a fault that effects the general operation of it... Whats also annoying as this is the 'upstairs' telly, which isnt used half as much as the TV downstairs so this is even more annoying! Is there any kind of act that even though the manufactures warranty has expired, I can 'lean on' as the consumer that the goods are not of good quality and have not lasted a reasonable amount of time... I cant really say to Sony that the TV was faulty upon purchase as the lines have only appeared now... Any help greatly appreciated, and keep up the fantastic work that you guys do here.

Hi, A newly opened Yoga places is offering a limited number of yearly memberships if they are prepaid in full. I been there lots the last month, I really like the place, it is convinient and the deal is great. Now the snagg, it must be prepaid in full, now I am being clever so paying it on my credit card for extra protection. I know I am going to use it so it pays of to get it BUT playing devil's advocate what are my consumer rights for a refund if I have an accident in lets say 6 month time and can't use it, or get evicted (not planning to but landlords are sometimes crazy) and move too far away. Could not find aything covering this in their T&C's and the girl on reception seemed very new so she couldn't answer. The nearest in the T&C's were this; "2.10 Subject to any statutory right of cancellation, payments for Memberships and Classes are non-refundable unless otherwise stated in these Terms and Conditions." So ignoring them and from a purely consumer rights perspective what are my rights to a refund if I have to cancel due to moving or for medical reasons? Is medical reasons and moving statutory rights? Thanks in advance

hi, i'm not sure where i stand with this, i got my warm home discount, which i'm grateful for..my electricity supplier is EDF, when i phoned to enquire whether i could get a refund of the £140..they said no..it was government money and it was not for me to spend on things as I please, but its for energy needs..they said it wasn't mine really..i enquired about them keeping it as they are making interest on it and he said that no, they're not making money on it..is this normal? i was paid my warm home discount last year..surely this is okay? any pointers or insgihts appreciated thanks.

Hi, Firstly, sorry if this is the wrong section. I wasn't sure if it should go in the retail forum or not. Earlier this year I (an individual) entered into an agreement with a company whereby I rent a web server from them. At the time of entering the agreement the Distance Selling Regulations (2000) were still in force. There was no minimum term to this contract, and there's no obligation for me to renew at the end of each renewal period. I make manual renewal payments each month by logging into their website, and clicking 'Renew' next to the relevant service. The expiry date of the service is listed next to the 'Renew' button and the subsequent page allows for the selection of the renewal duration (1 month, 3 months, etc). If I want to cancel a server, I do not need to contact the company. Non-payment/non-renewal is considered cancellation. An administrative mishap last month led to their systems automatically deleting one of my servers which involves wiping its hard disks to the point where data recovery is impossible. This deletion has caused inconvenience and loss of data. I still have one server with them, but I am no longer able to trust them, and am worried the same mistake may occur with this server this month. I've therefore moved all data from it to another provider. Their current contract is still worded pursuant to DSR and allows a customer to cancel within 7 days without giving reason. I contacted the company informing them that I wish to use my right under the Consumer Contracts Regulations (2013) to cancel the server, and expect a pro-rated refund for the time remaining in this renewal period. They replied stated they did not believe my rights under CCR reply as I am on a "rolling monthly contract". However, it's my contention that every time I manually renew the server, a new contract is formed (for the duration of the renewal period I select) along with all the rights and protections afforded by the CCR. What do you think? Am I within my rights to cancel this renewal? Thanks

Hi peeps, here we go again. Every year there seems to be something, even though been trying to keep my head down low! So I need some advice. Last year (1 year 7 months ago) I purchased a domain for a potential get back "into work business", I purchased the domain name based on personal experience and the service provided. I checked IP search and at the time there was "no trademark" nor application for one. I had no trouble securing the domain I wanted. Upon developing the website I noticed another website with a similar plural version of my domain name although a different TLD. The website was not providing the same service but providing a connection between people such as myself and those who wanted people such as myself. A portal. Plural and Singular domains often coexist, and as our services were different although in similar area, I didn't think anything more of it. End of this May, I received a personal email basically telling me I had infringed on their IP due to complaint/confusions, that I set up the website in "bad faith" claiming I am "passing off" against their name and threatening court which will be extremely costly to me. I responded immediately, reasons I was denying this claim and that this claim appeared to be an attempt at "reverse domain name hijacking". Nonetheless, I offered a compromise of a disclaimer, and if this was not acceptable to consider alternatives that would satisfy them. I didn't hear anything back from them, until few weeks ago just prior to going on the first holiday in 8 years. Literally few days before. I was setting up a market stall on a Sunday morning in town, when a man came up to me and said you have been served regarding a domain you own. I was so shocked! Basically a package with letter, form to sign on my own headed paper, and images of my website, twitter and facebook and theirs. It was from a solicitors in London now acting on behalf of the man who contacted me initially. They are very prestigious by all accounts. Their claim infringement of IP and demanding I hand over my domain to them immediately and sign the paper to the affect I would remove my fb and twitter account, not set up another similar sounding website or (and this is what got me) any variations and pay costs. (front page said if I did this by x time they would waver costs). I contacted an IP lawyer who gave a free initial consultation, sent him docs, and he felt that yes they had a case but I also had one and that it was going to cost me at least £600 to start the process of rebuttal. Well, I didn't have that kind of money. My holiday was a birthday present from my family and not wanting to dampen my holiday, I wrote back saying I had prearrangement and i would get legal advice upon my return, but as a gesture of good will I would put a disclaimer on my website, and deactivate (not delete) my fb and twitter accounts in the interim. They wrote email and letter back saying the noted the deactivation and have given me till 5th Dec. So, here I am. Been doing lots of research on their alleged intellectual property rights. They first applied to trademark in oct 13 months after I had set up site, but it was in response to someone else trying to get trademarks, they opposed it, and managed to get the other parties application over turned, however their own application was withdrawn (due to non payment of second fee). They then applied for a EU trade mark with an image of their website name, it's in the publishing stage, but they also are trying to get that name IP (uk) and that's in the examination stage. So technically, they don't own the trademark of that name, yet. They have a case under "common law". Sorry it's long and not to bare my predicament any longer, just wondering how I should tackle this? I am happy to remove website (as I have had no client so far via it) for out of pocket expenses (realistic wise) and set up with a new domain however suggesting this may be deemed as my intention which it most certainly was not! I feel their demands of signing to any variants is unreasonable without stating what those variants are, due to the descriptive and generic nature of the service, and area they could oppose me at every turn. Would truly appreciate any help and advice, thought tackling Barclays was hard enough but this is way out of my league!

HI everyone I work in field sales, and my manager audited me and was viewing cctv of my visit to a store which they then used to say i wasn't doing my job correctly I'm just wondering if this is legal for them to do that

hi I am new here but would like some help. i bought a cheap car from a dealer and it had a few problems. They tried to fix them and then found that the water pump also needed fixing. As I needed the car they offered to just exchange for another.....Thinking about it I decided that it was maybe best to just take the other car. I was issued no exchange receipt, no new invoice.....nothing.. anyway - I was not too happy - but happy enough to just have the other car and go. it seemed reasonable. I was told that the car had MOT til Oct. I was given a reference number to do the online tax and told I could drive home on the dealers 'drive away' insurance. I got home and immediately set about the tax and informing my insurer - only to find the car has no MOT. the dealer is 20 miles from my home, it was Friday afternoon - when I telephone at 4pm they said they would have to get back to me- and I got a text at 5.05pm saying YES it has no MOT. tried to call back - no answer I needed the car for work that night and this weekend and am angry I called 9am Saturday morning and was told to get a MOT locally... I don't feel that this is really my responsibility... I mean what if it doesnt pass. I am then out of pocket on the MOT and then what? Anyway I asked that we just swap back..I mean the other car is still taxed and insured in my name..yes it wasn't the best but at least it had MOT. I was told the car was no longer there...the mechanic had taken it... It is still in my name - I have all the documents, tax and insurance.. where do I stand? What should I do. I am confused... thanks in advance

Hi everyone. I wonder if I can get some advice, as I do believe my statutory rights are being violated, but am not a lawyer. I purchased some hair extensions on Very.co.uk and it stated the following message on the product page: Non returnable under our Approval Guarantee, once installed or connected. I received the product in a brown postage box and the extensions were inside within a sealed plastic bag. I could see that the hair was not the colour I wanted, so I returned them in their sealed packaging with the seal intact. They were not installed or connected, so should have been returnable according to the sites description A few days later, they were returned to me with a charge claiming they were not returnable because the seal had been broken. I double checked the product and the seal on the bag is still intact, so I wrote to them for clarification with photos. The lady I have been in communication with is very vague and simply said: "I am advising that the seal on the box cannot be removed due to health and hygiene reasons . There is a see through strip on the box so that the item can be viewed from there ." The only box that exists is the outer postage box, and there were no holes or otherwise on this. it seems that I was not allowed to open the outer brown box that the product was sent in, but this is silly as I couldn't verify the contents without opening that box. Nor were there any markings to suggest that the return would be void if this was opened. What are my rights here? As I said before, the plastic bag around the hair is still sealed, and the hair is within another plastic wrap and cardboard backing within that one. The only broken seal is on the postage box itself. I'd appreciate any assistance. Thanks

Hello forum, I hope someone can help me as I'm feeling quite stressed about my situation. I am stressed at the lack of customer service I've received where people misquote prices and don't seem to care you have a timetable you need to stick to - they're quite happy to mess around with timings and not be accurate enough when they quote timings, they just don't care and they just want the sale. Quick bit of background and then will ask my questions. I ordered a Tamla lazy boy sofa 3 seater and a 1 seater (manual recliners) and was told 7-8 weeks for delivery. I was unaware at the time there was a free carpet offer on. The offer was only for 16sq m of carpet anyway on certain carpets. This is what I'm having issues with. To begin with it was never really made clear which carpet was actually included as 'free' but he seemed happy for me to think the £12.99 per sq m was included. This matter was cleared up on a later visit and I switched my attention to the carpet that was actually included in the offer. The sales rep seemed knowledgeable but when it came to sorting out the carpet, he quoted me something that would only have been confirmed by the guy who came to measure my front room. He had not been given any information about my order, just told to measure the front room and quoted me for the price of a £5.99 per sq m carpet. Anyway, I went back to the store in Dartford twice to decide on the carpet and was told that the carpet fitter was not aware that I had ordered a lazyboy sofa which is why his quote was different to what the store quoted. I'm still not sure I was actually quoted correctly at all. I had opted for the £9.99 per sq m carpet anyway which was included as the free carpet and had to paid the remaining balance. I even took a picture and confirmed it with the same rep as before that that was the carpet that would be delivered. He told me it was called pewter. I have since found out that pewter is not the colour I wanted. I generally don't do colour coordination or know the variations of colours but if I show you a picture and point to the actual sample I want then how can you tell me a colour is pewter when it isn't? The carpet fitter came on Saturday morning - called me at 8 am to say he'd be there in 20 mins - so I'm rushing around to get my boy out the house and left my partner to deal with the fitting. When I came back I saw that the carpet was not the colour I was expecting - I had confirmed it twice in the store, even took a photo and made sure it matched with that I told the same sales rep. as above, he wrote pewter. The problem is, and now my questions: I cannot find anything on the contract about what to do if SCS mess up and have the wrong colour carpet delivered, particularly if the carpet seems to be the £12.99 per sq m carpet not included in the deal. It has now been fitted and even my partner said to the fitters that it didn't look the right colour but they weren't going to not fit it or contact SCS to check for any mistakes. It was really early in the morning and my partner let them fit the carpet, he doesn't mind the different colour but I usually sort this stuff out. If I had been at home then would I have been able to say 'no' to the fitters and call SCS there and then? The fitters didn't seem to care about having the wrong carpet. So, I now have the wrong colour carpet. It's not a major problem but my new sofas will clash and I don't know how SCS could confirm one thing and still get it wrong. I just don't know my rights. I'm ok with a different colour carpet but I don't want to be charged any extra for their mistake if they have given me the £12.99 per sq m carpet. 1) Is there anything in law that covers me for the mistake made by SCS meaning I don't have to pay extra if they've delivered and fitted a more expensive carpet? As far as I can see if they have misquoted then they bear the loss because I have already paid them. To add, if it's not the more expensive carpet they've delivered then there really isn't a problem at all and I can just complain that it's the wrong colour and leave it at that and call them incompetent. There is nothing in the contract that I can see that covers this type of event, only matters arising from defects. 2) Is there anything in law that covers me for any mistakes made in their quotations for the carpet fitting, underlay and fixings? - I am wondering if I have been misquoted and paid more than I should have. The fitters were supposed to bring 2 gold bars for the 2 doors but they didn't. I also haven't received the rug doctor cleaning kit which I was promised. 2) I am now worried about my lazy boy sofas not being delivered on time. If delivery takes longer than 7-8 weeks what can I do about it? It seems futile to complain to head office but is there anything is law that covers me? I'm not sure what this would be exactly. 3) I don't know how long I have to inform them of the situation but need to know my rights first. They quote 72 hours for sofa delivery issues but say nothing about carpets. I want to call head office to find out their policy on this but after reading reviews of their customer service I'm not sure I will be given the right information. I will go to SCS today to sort out the rug doctor kit and the gold bars issues. I will tell them I have sought legal advice in case I have been misquoted prices and have been delivered the carpet not included in the deal. I will not be paying any money to them but will ask them to make sure that the tamla lazy boys are on track and again quote that I have sought legal advice in case they are not delivered on time. Until someone can advise me on my rights I will just let them know I am aware of mistakes they have made and will take the matter further if I get any hassle from them. I apologise my writing's all over the place but is anyone able to help me? thank you in advance

Hi there, I hope I am asking this question in the correct section (Admins please change if not) Can someone help me understand section 147 employment rights act 1996 ( in plain english) with regards to what it says about "initiating rights " to claiming redundancy. my partner's job role as been made redundant. There is an interim post on the table ( not very appealing) and also a "voluntary" redundancy package ( which is basically the minimum redundancy package) on the table. My partner is wanting to understand the mortgage protection cover she has in regards to the above "voluntary" redundancy package. The exclusion policy states.... you will not receive monthly benefit for unemployment in the following circumstances: unemployment caused by or resulting from: ii) any wilful act by you;or iii) resignation or voluntary unemployment- for the avoidance of doubt this shall exclude voluntary redundancy where you initiated your right to claim redundancy under section 147 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 time is of the essence as a decision will need to be made early next week.. and this information will have a bearing on the decison Many thanks in advance,

basically i sold a vehicle then within 24 hrs i was contacted by the buyer who told me the engine warning light came on,i knew nothing of the engine warning light coming on when i had it,he's now saying he's bringing the vehicle back and wants the money back,even though ive sent the log book off already,cancelled insurance, the buyer is obviously angry about the situation, he actually thinks ive had the engine warning light switched off myself which i haven't.the buyer had a good look around it and took it for a drive and was happy with it, so were do i stand? thanks

This bloke was rubbish as a Prime Minister, and now he is telling the rest of us what to do. He has hit out at David Cameron and accused him of being ‘unstatesmanlike’ in attempting to stop Scottish MPs voting at Westminster, on only English issues, but he is happy with the extra powers Scotland will receive to make their own laws without hindrance from the Parliament at Westminster. (English MPs will not be able to vote on laws in Scotland that do not affect the rest of the UK). The former Prime Minister said the move could drive a ‘wedge’ between England and Scotland. (I thought Salmonde and the referendum had already done that?) He says the Tory plan for ‘English votes for English laws’ would turn the Scots into second-class citizens because their Westminster MPs would be downgraded. (you could say the same about Scottish MPs voting on Scottish only laws as downgrading the rest of the UK MPs, what is good for one is good for another). The three Westminster leaders promised to devolve more power to the Scottish parliament. This anomaly whereby Scottish MPs can vote on English matters but English MPs have little or no say north of the border is wrong. Brown criticised this approach. He said I fear for the health and unity of our country, (make of that what you will, it just makes me laugh words are cheap). He said Mr Cameron made an unstatesmanlike error when, he tried to rewrite his vow with a proposal for restricting the rights of Scottish MPs to vote at Westminster’. (He wants his cake and eat it). He adds: the morning after the referendum, allegations of foul play, broken promises and bad faith began, with a wedge being driven between Scotland and England. (I am still of the opinion that it would have been better for us all if they had got their independence, this cr*p is going to carry on until they do). Link

Hi Last night a large frameless shower screen 'exploded' in my daughters bathroom. There was no one in the room at the time fortunately. It had been installed by a competent bathroom installer a week before. My daughter has been using the shower for a week. The company who supplied the screen say that they are not responsible, one defence they used was that its only our word that no one was in the room. I understand that tempered glass can explode spontaneously. The glass was bought by our installer from the glass supplier. Our installer works for himself and I do not think it is fair for him or us to pay for a new screen. Should the supplier take responsibility? Also if there is damage to the bathroom are they liable? Advice gratefully received as the best they are offering is a discounted replacement. If they are responsible please advise me on what to say to them. Thank you in advance for any help

That would leave us with Belarus and Kazakhstan as the only European countries who haven't signed up for human rights. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/uk-scraps-human-rights-act-4350443#ixzz3EtmaLEIP Wishful thinking I think.

I am not sure if this is the correct place on this site for queries about the State Pension but could see no mention of pensions anywhere so someone might point me to another section. This is a little complicated but here goes. I was on ESA back in 2010, got put in support group for 6 months (letter appeared 2 weeks before my appeal hearing) but then 4 months later I had to start the process again with another E50 (?) form to fill in and new ATOS medical. Of course I failed the medical and lodged an appeal immediately in I think June of 2011 - it took some time to get the ATOS appoinment. My appeal took even longer, although then you still received the basic ESA of around £70 per week while awaiting appeal. I believe now this is not the case and you have to go on JSA until the appeal is heard, something I could not cope with. I finally got the appeal hearing in October 2012 which I failed and my benefit was immediately stopped. Due to my health issues (mental health) I find it impossible to face going into the Job Centre to register for JSA. I had to give up my flat and stay with various friends around the country. In 2013 I managed with some difficulty to find work, through an agency which was very irregular, only 4 shifts in two months, while I was staying with a friend. I then found a permanent position but only lasted 8 weeks as it was more than I could cope with. Faced with the prospect of not having any income until my state pension in 2020 (I am one of the unlucky ones who has to wait until I am 66) I took my modest savings (under the limit for claiming benefits) and came to live in Turkey, where I can manage on just £30 per week for everything! However I am not sure my savings are going to last another 6 years, even here prices go up. what are the criteria for receiving the state pension early (although technically not early as all my working life I thought I would be claiming it this week when I turn 60!) on health grounds? I know if you are terminally ill you can get it sooner but how do they class terminal illness? My condition is permanent and although I have repeatedly tried to work during the past it does not last long before I am again unable to do so. I cannot cope with going into the Job Centre to answer their questions and fill in their forms. I am not comfortable around people which is why I cannot last long in jobs. I know this sounds like a feeble excuse but I can assure you it is a very real problem. Receiving my pension early would relieve all the stress of having to come back to the UK and try to sign on for JSA or try (and fail again) to claim ESA and then try to find a flat and live on £71 per week, which as everyone knows is incredibly difficult. Is there anyone on here that can point me in the direction of who to contact for answers to this question? Many thanks for reading.

I have received a home rights notice from the land registry which was instigated by my absent wife who left me nearly three years ago. I now don't know my wifes whereabouts, she doesn't reply to my emails so I can't discuss this issue with her. She hasn't petitioned for divorce so I don't know where I stand. The home rights notice states that I can't sell the house without my wifes permission. However, as I can't communicate with her I seem to be stuck in a situation that I can't solve. Being legally unable to sell it without permission that I cannot obtain what should I do? The home rights notice doesn't say that I can't demolish the house so I assume that would be legally acceptable. I would be happy to negotiate a sale of the house with my wife if she would only communicate with me. Should I just demolish the house and ignore the home rights notice if my wife continues to ignore my emails? Being notified by the land registry that I can't sell my house without the permission of someone who's location is unknown and I can't borrow any money against the equity implies that the house is worth nothing.

Hi I haven't been on here for a while I was wondering if I could get any help I have 3 items from brighthouse for the amount of £20 a week I recently came out of work and have been on benefits but recently got a 6 month sanction I have told brighthouse this and worked out my affordable amount I have as I only get child benefit and tax credits as £5 spare each week I have paid over a third on all 3 goods but brighthouse won't accept this amount even if my agreement was to be made longer what suggestions is there that I could do as I need the 3 items for day to day life and without them I don't think I would be able to be seen in public as I need to wash my clothes any advice would be great as I have explained to them 4 or 5 times about my circumstances and they just don't listen

I’ll try to be as brief as possible whilst giving all relevant info, so please bear with me! I have worked for the same company for almost 5 years, initially I was employed part time but within a yr was made full time. The company had been downsizing for a couple of years and had gone from a six company outfit down to one company, although the last company had gone into administration and wound up, it continued to operate as always but had added uk ltd to its former company name. The staff were retained but no employment contracts were given and they used the services of an agency to pay our wages through, having investigated said agency it would appear that it was set up for the sole purpose of administering our wages as the incorporation date and details coincide with the start up of the new company, also I discovered that the company behind the agency is registered to the same address as the accountants used by my employer, I don’t know how relevant that is. Any way I worked an 8am -5pm day , mon-fri for the past almost five years. We were given 21 days holiday per yr, overtime was compensated by time off in lieu, and sick pay at managers discretion, I was never sick so don’t know how that actually worked. I think that brings us up to date, so I was on annual leave for 10 days and on the final day my boss rang me and said, things have happened Im not sacking you but im gonna have to make you redundant, don’t come in tomorrow!! This method has been employed by her for at least the last 4 employees that I know of!! So I had just been paid my monthly salary and we were at the end of a month. I expected to be paid something the end of August but nothing, when I called I was informed that I was due nothing as I has been sacked?! I tried to clarify this but my calls go to answerphone – any advice would be appreciated.

Hello A woman took my husband to the small claims court for a cheque that she had made payable to me. At the second hearing the judge or sheriff (I'm not really sure what they are called) threw the case out as the case should have been brought against me. He then went on to explain to the woman that she should take a small claims out against me as it was me that she wrote the cheque out to. He then said it was me that was liable for the cheque, (even though I was acting as an agent for this cheque) and that if the woman takes out a small claims against me he would probably make a judgment in her favor. What I want to know is have my human rights been violated in this case, as the judge/sheriff has not afforded me the chance to put my case across and would not let me explain about the cheque and told this woman to take a claim out against me and she will probably win. I am now receiving abusive letters from this woman stating that as the judge/sheriff said it was me that was liable, she wants her money back. Any thoughts or help would be appreciated.