Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'inflated'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 4 results

  1. Good evening guys.. Hope you are all in good health. I was posted a parking fine by Smart Parking for overstaying the free parking time in North London. I accept this may have been possible, but I put the letter to one side and forgot all about it. I have now received a letter from debt recovery plus reminding me of the outstanding parking fine but is now double the cost :-/ I am willing to pay the fine but I don't think its right I am expected to now pay double the charge. I have tried to pay on line and by phone, but Smart Parking will now not take my payment. Any advise or do I just pay them whatever they decide to demand?
  2. In April 2008 my partner was dealt with by way of a County Court debt brought about by British Credit Trust. Since 2008 until December 2013 she never missed a payment. In December 2014 British Credit Trust sold the debt on to Lowell Financial for a sum of the original county court summons plus their charges. She argued that this was not correct and this has ended up with an adjudicator at the Financial Ombudsman who says that this is correct and my partner needs to discuss with Lowell a monthly repayment. Lowell also wrote for some time through their own admitted error to a previous address despite knowing my partners new address. There is only just over £1,500 left ( dont have specific figures to hand ) my question is is it lawfull for Lowell to demand repayment of the full county court amount plus charges and why is the adjudicator for the ombudsman dismissing these facts as irrelevant sinkinghelp
  3. A friend of mine worked as a delivery driver. During his employment, the company arranged for him to undertake driver training and a test to enable him to drive larger vehicles. He signed an agreement requiring him to repay the training costs if he left within two years. On that document was the phrase "total training costs £2000" below the signatures. Three days after the agreement was signed (and before the training actually took place) he had an assessment session with the external driver training provider who said his ability was such that only a few training sessions were needed, and the total cost of the training and examination (which he passed) came to c £950. He left the company seven months after the agreement was signed and expected to have to repay the £950. However, the company is claiming £2000 "because that was what he signed for". He has refused to pay more than the actual cost incurred and now has received a solicitor's letter demanding the £2000. I have read about re-claim of training costs and understand any reclaim must be based on "a genuine pre-estimate of costs", and that anything above that may be deemed a penalty and thus not legally enforceable. In this instance the actual costs were less than half of that estimate and were known before the training was undertaken. Paying anything more than £950 would mean not only does the company contribute nothing to training, but they also make a profit from it! Where do you think he stands legally on this? Secondly, I understand that such repayment agreements should include a sliding scale, so the amount reclaimed reduces over time to reflect the value the company gets from the training. This agreement had a sliding scale but it was very back-skewed - 100% repayable up to 18 months, 75% up to 21 months, 50% up to 24 months. they had just over six months of value from his ability to drive their larger vehicles but the sliding scale makes no reflection of that. Again, does that stand up legally?
  4. Hey, I recently applied for a job which was way above my pay scale but very similar in responsibilities. Stupidly, I inflated my current salary slightly so it looked more in line with the new position. Now I've been offered the job and background checks have started. I'm concerned that my 'white lie' will be discovered. I have found the following thread info on the subject.. Is this correct? http ://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110820063708AA7O9OH References normally NEVER include salary details because that would be against the Data Protection Act. Your last employer cannot reveal your financial information to anyone else unless you authorise them to. Thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...