Hi, I am new here and hope to find somebody who can help me. I had an EU driving licence which expired last month. when I applied for the UK driving licence I had to declare a medical condition which I had six year ago but that it is no longer something I suffer from, infact I have been off medication for a couple of years and I am not under the supervision of any doctors. the NHS consultant I saw for driving licence wrote a letter summarising the history of the problem and attesting that I met all the criteria for fitness to drive, and discharged me with no further appointments or care required. After 5 weeks since I applied for the UK license the DVLA had received the medical questionnaire and the letter from the consultant (which starts by saying "I see no reason why she should not drive a vehicle), and have said that my case has been referred to a DVLA doctor who has to check that my condition meets the criteria above. and that this is not going to happen before January next year, which seems like a very long time to not have a license. I have tried to get more information but they are just rude, robotic call centre people who wind you up, and repeat that they have to deal with cases from all the UK. I wanted to try the complaint procedure or possibly to look at getting professional legal advice. I can't understand why when an NHS specialist consultant has written to the DVLA to say I can drive, it should have to go to their doctor who can't respond until January. I can drive under the law section 88 road traffic act 1988 but I do not feel confident without the driving licence. plus I cannot go to visit family abroad with my baby as is illegal there going around without driving licence with you. has anyone had any similar experiences? any advice would be much appreciated. thanks

Ok the story so far: Sold car October 2012 Sent off V5 - Kept photocopy for records in case went missing. Went missing - Letter from DVLA with fine etc January 2012 Sent letter to DVLA with copy confirming sent back in accordance with instruction. Letter received back in March 2012, saying if no proof prior to February 2012 will fine take to court. Sent response, confirming already sent enclosing copies of previous letter. No response until yesterday, when received court summons for non sending of V5 back to DVLA. Unfortunately I move house during this period and have misplaced the documentation and copies I sent back, so looking for advice on what to do next, court options are; Guilty Guilty with mittergating circumstances Not Guilty So what do I do, I misplaced the copy correspondence my stupid fault . All opinions appreciated

Having read this Default Re: Royal Mail Customs handling Fee Response all what follows is pretty well useless Oh dear Looks like I have missed the boat. Hi all, Having had some time to think about my situation with FedEx a few ideas have surfaced. But before I start I will apologise in advance to anybody who may feel that I have misrepresented or distorted the facts to justify my hypothesise about the subject. These are just the type of thoughts and ideas that wander through one’s head in the early hours of the morning. So here I go. FedEx et all will never take any one to court over the admin fee as it stands to loose a massive revenue stream if it looses the case. Why? Current business model for £100 value item of weight 500gms for a casual importer. Offer to ship item for £22 from China to UK house address. Deliver said item to address. Send recipient a bill for customs fees (£30) and admin charge (£12). Previous year’s Model of costs £22 carriage and £8 admin. Hypothetical next year’s carriage cost £22 and admin £18. This is looking very good. Next year cost £22 and admin £24. This is looking even better. They have kept their offer price of carriage fixed at £22 but increased their revenue by approximately %150. And it gets better still. The logistics of getting a parcel from China to the UK is no small challenge. Whereas a few key taps on a PC key board is generating more revenue. It would appear that FedEx should become an admin company and subcontract the carriage I know that is could be viewed as quite simplistic, but it should give one a flavour of the idea. Well what about the other carriers. It would appear that they are all doing the same. Where is the competition? No need to increase your quotes just increase the admin. Cartel? Transparency? Confusion? So, If you refuse to pay what will any of the carriers do? Well originally not a lot. I noticed that most successful results against Fedex are historic. If you complained they would waive the admin cost. However a recent visit to Controlaccounts web site boasts For a leading global freight company weimproved cashflow by 12%, see how we can do the same for you. And who might that be? Now this is the Nub of the issue. Fear and threats work on most people where money is concerned and getting a DCA involved allows FedEx to be hands off. Threatening to sue clients is not their businesses. Also the task of defending your action against such a barrage of threats is quite daunting especially for £12 along with no guaranteed chance of winning against the might of a giant international corporation and no clear precedent. The outcome is pay up. However if by chance a valiant knight comes to the rescue and challenges the Dragon what might happen. Without doubt, FedEx would walk away long before it went to court as the last thing it wants is a precedent to be established about this very grey area against the plaintive. Why? They could lose, and that risk of £12 vs. £10000’s of annual income is not a good bet. And so for as long as this situation lasts one has two choice (1) pay up and shut up (2) Do not pay and be prepared for a long unpleasant time of threats, abuse, fear, anxiety, lasting over many months that should result in no £12 admin fee being paid.

c I have a long running complaint with MBNA, which is stuck in the MBNA interpretative calculations thread. I’m looking on a second opinion on these circumstances. My own complaint is not based on a miss sale but MBNA applying PPI when the original application which I have a copy of stated no to PPI. The communications log I have with MBNA starts in June 2000; PPI was applied from Jan 1999 the start point of the card. I have no recollection of discussing PPI with MBNA other than requests for it to be stopped which they refused unless I paid the card off in full. In my own case I don’t receive any benefit from my claim; it has only been brought on a matter of principle. Any claim belongs to my trustee in bankruptcy, but if MBNA were to pay out using FOS guidelines the amount would have cleared all my unsecured debts plus my mortgage arrears at the time and still l have left a reasonable sum. I took the decision to declare bankruptcy due to MBNA constant harassment and wanting to be able to start living again. If I was aware in 2010 that I had a claim with MBNA that would have cleared all my unsecured debts, then I would have continued to struggle on until it was resolved. Now MBNA have offered to make a payment in goodwill, I had to agree to this in principle before the offer was sent out. . Can I reject the offer of goodwill and ask MBNA how the PPI was applied to an account which did not give authority to do so Even looking at the rather understated offer by MBNA the Credit card would have been paid off in 2009, the extra £130 a month I was paying them would of cleared my mortgage arrears in 6 months at that time. My real question really is if MBNA aren’t going to play by the rules in regard to PPI redress can I take my complaint to a higher authority. Is there a potential to make a claim for consequential losses?

I will keep this as brief as possible. A letting agent was initially approached to a tenancy and the applicant was asked to provide a 'guarantor' to the rent. My 'client' was willing to stand in that capacity and he completed and signed an application to become the said guarantor. That application was then processed and due to him not having a high enough income his application was refused. The letting agent and LL agreed the tenancy to the son without a guarantor. The son later ran into arrears with the rent and eventually he left the property. The landlord then took to recover the rent from my 'client' naming him to be the guarantor, when the matter got into court my 'client' ask for the obvious.....copy of the agreement that showed him as guarantor, the court ordered the LL to provide that document. LL submitted documents to the Court that were allegedly signed by my 'Client' as guarantor...despite my 'client' objecting very loudly to the fact he had never had sight of the documents prior to that moment, he had to agree the signature did look to be his. Judgment(s) were given to the claimant (LL) My 'client' was subsequently chased by Sherforce and forced to pay. Still protesting to the fact he had never signed the documents given in evidence to the Court, my 'client' engaged the services of a Court approved forensic handwriting expert.There is now no doubt the signature on the documents has been forged. Being in receipt of state and a small private pension my 'client' was refused legal aid to get this all reopened by appeal and he does not have the finances to instruct a solicitor. It was suggested he simply made a N1 claim to recover the monies he has paid to these Judgments (3) but it has now been suggested he cannot do that until such time as the Judgments are appealed. Full circle.. Can anyone offer clarity to the way forward? WD

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-department-for-work-and-pensions-dwp-don-t-cut-off-people-s-benefits-while-the-government-gives-a-second-opinion-on-who-is-fit-for-work

Dear All I would greatly appreciate your opinion in my insurance dispute. We notified our insurer of believed subsidence post exchange of contract. The purchaser did not complete the sale of our home but we completed on the sale of the new home we were moving to. Our insurer investigated & repudiated our claim stating “During my own visit I could not detect any recent subsidence damage even accompanied by yourself using a dumpy level” Long storey short after 5 years & 10 months from commencement of the subsidence our insurer has accepted 196mm of subsidence across the entirety of our home & that at minimum half the property requires demolition. Our property is classified as dangerous & Category 5 worse case of structural damage. Once our insurer accepted subsidence liability we asked for the another claim. The relevant clause within our Insurance policy states: “Where you are selling your home we will pay for loss or damage arising from any cause listed in this section during the period between exchange of contracts and completion date to any purchaser of your home. Our liability for your home will end when your insurable interest in the home ends, which is normally when you vacate the home following completion and you hand over the keys to the buyer.” The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) believe that the average person test should be engaged to this coverage. The Financial Ombudsman believes this means: “We must also consider the reasonable person test i.e. how would an average person read and understand the statement. In this instance I believe an average person would assume the following; the losses or damage referred to are limited to those caused to the building by an insured peril. Also, I believe the average person would understand the statement, “the period between exchange of contracts and completion date to any purchaser of your home”, to mean the normal length of time this process takes and if a purchaser pulls out of the sale the period then stops and the policy reverts to standard cover, not a totally unlimited time until a new buyer is found.” The opinion I wish to ask is what the open public insurance purchasers believe/understand as to this policy clause! “Where you are selling your home we will pay for loss or damage arising from any cause listed in this section during the period between exchange of contracts and completion date to any purchaser of your home. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS AS THE ORIGIONAL PROPOSED PURCHASER OR ANY PURCHASER. Our belief is that as long as we the seller has retained an insurable interest in our home we are covered for any loss as there are no exclusions until a new purchaser is found. We have even offered the property to our insurer who does’t want it. We believe this is important in a buildings insurance policy if this was not the case and there is an occurrence of physical damage between the times of exchange and completion which induced a buyer not to complete or to delay completion and payment, the Sellers would suffer loss that might prove irrecoverable. SECONDLY, when does the insurance companies liability end? "Our liability for your home will end when your insurable interest in the home ends, which is normally when you vacate the home following completion and you hand over the keys to the buyer.” IS IT AS IT SAYS ON THE BOX OR as the Ombudsman puts it “the normal length of time this process takes and if a purchaser pulls out of the sale the period then stops”. Thank you in advance for your time & comments.

I have owned my Ford Escort Mk 6 for 14 years (since 7k miles, now 118k). I have always used the same local independent garage for MOTs and any repairs, (very few, minor ones - cats, exhausts, brakes, wheel bearings, etc). The previous MOT tester was absolutely straight. I have done 3k miles per year for the past 6 years. At MOT in 2011, my car needed a small amount of welding, with advisory brake adjustment. Last year the MOT failed on a spring, with no advisory. This year the garage changed hands, and the new owner has just been trained for MOTs. Yesterday, my car failed horrifically on corrosion - 1) Offside outer front - front seat belt anchorage. 2) Offside front (floor) - ditto. 3) Nearside outer rear (sill) - suspension component mounting. 4) Nearside outer rear (chassis) - ditto. 5) Offside outer rear (chassis) - ditto. All were judged to be "excessively corroded". Advisory: brake pipes deteriorating. I've been quoted, by the garage, £1000 for 18 hours welding. I cannot understand how so much corrosion can suddenly become obvious in 3k miles, without any earlier signs! There is corrosion, undoubtedly, but that much? Should I appeal or have my car re-tested at the local Council MOT centre? Should I spend my £1000 on my mechanically sound car which is really reliable, or on a banger that will be a gamble?

Hi all, been reading these forums for a while and found it much help! I work for a high-street retailer and have recently "stepped" down from a mangerial position to my original position as a customer service advisor. Basically my contracted hours are 20 and have been since I was a CSA, (since Jan 2010) but to"step down" back into my original position I would have to take a 10 hour cut in my contract, I declined and asked management for them to justify this and was told the hours "are not there". I feel this is unfair because: - Another manager who recently stepped back down to a CSA has been in the organisation 11 months and has managed to get a 16 hour contract. (His managerial contract was 16, worked 39 hours as a manager but as a CSA before his promotion had a 8 hour contract as a CSA) - The store is currently advertising for new 8hour customer service advisors to join the company. - I was not issued a contract of terms relating to my managerial promotion which began in January 2013 (first pay date 18th). However I was verbally told there is a 3 month probation and was told my "contracted hours" would be the same as my previous role of customer serive. (I notified my manager on the 1st April 2013 of my intent to step down) My contract for customer service states in the terms that "Your working hours are subject to variation and directed by your manager" but at the top it states "Contracted Hours: 20. I have no updated contract since I stepped up to my promotion in January. It's a bit of a complicated situation but would anyone mind giving their thoughts if this is enough evicence to support a formal grievane to obtain my original hours back? Much appreciated!

I am looking for some comments / critisism / feedback on a product. It is a heat sensitive mug which reveals text when it gets hot. Do you think this is a good concept? If not, why? - Thanks in advance - P.S. I am currently completing a project and am interested in the opinions of people such as yourselves who are discussing consumer products, so ANY comments are much appreciated.