Showing results for tags 'says'.
-
HSBC now owns HFC Bank in Brighton. I wrote to HSBC Coventry PPI claims office giving my name, DOB and precise former address, last week, but they replied to say: no records of my account can be found after 32 years, and that they are not legally obliged to retain documents beyond the statutory period if an account was closed. I also opened a Loan Account in Bournemouth and fully repaid around 1983. -- same answer from HSBC: no records. I myself have retained no records whatsoever, but I am absolutely certain I had those accounts, and 70% sure there was PPI as was standard custom in those days. Is this a dead end? Should I invest in £10 requesting a SAR, if so SAR sent to HSBC Coventry or to HFC Bank in Brighton? Later to complain to FOS if we suspect HSBC does have records? Thanks to all for sharing experience. -
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/408616-trying-to-reclaim-ppi-but-paragon-says-no/?tab=comments#comment-4978454 same boat mate, paragon say no and not regulated Paragon informed me that the PPI was done by warranty Holdings Ltd, guess what, now dissolved -
Fascinatingly complex scenario when you make an effort. After being made unemployed in July I have been trying to do bits and bobs with casual work for three employers whilst I look after my ill mum and look for a more permanent position. I get a nice tax rebate with a pay packet of just one weeks work for one of the employers and therefore do not get any Universal Credit for October because the pay plus the rebate takes me over the threshold of income for that month because the DWP takes tax rebates as pay. Fair enough but they then go and tell my council that my Universal Credit claim has been cancelled so I have to go through all the rigmarole of sending pay slips, hours worked, bank balances and the like to the council re council tax benefit and the council interestingly "do not" class tax rebates as income or pay! Regardless having more than one employer on a casual basis is a nightmare with the council who don't seem to know how to handle it and I may well have full whack council tax one month and then have to reapply monthly depending on wage which is always low anyway! So I have now had to email UC to see if I need to reclaim because I might not earn anything from the three employers this month although another nice little confusion arrived in the form of a small pay check from one employer with yet another healthy tax rebate,,,, two in one month from different employers?!?!?! Transpires that rebate earlier this month may be an error but I won't find out until the end of the tax year when I might, or might not have to pay it back!!! Either work full time or not at all seems to be the easiest way to avoid mega confusion on all counts as three mini employers is a logistical nightmare!!
-
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as: - Knowing when to come in out of the rain; - Why the early bird gets the worm; - Life isn't always fair; - And maybe it was my fault. Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge). His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition. Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion. Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims. Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault. Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement. Common Sense was preceded in death, -by his parents, Truth and Trust, -by his wife, Discretion, -by his daughter, Responsibility, -and by his son, Reason. He is survived by his 5 stepbrothers; - I Know My Rights - I Want It Now - Someone Else Is To Blame - I'm A Victim - Pay me for Doing Nothing Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. -
Bells to ring out and 10,000 to march past the Cenotaph as the nation says 'thank you' READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bells-to-ring-out-and-10000-to-march-past-the-cenotaph-as-the-nation-says-thank-you -
Hi, hope someone can advise me on this. My letting agent is telling me that at the end of my current contract, they want me to sign a 12 month contract otherwise I will have to leave. I looked on my tenancy agreement and it states the following TWELVE MONTHS beginning 6th july 2017. If the tenant does not leave at the end of the fixed term, the tenancy will continue, still subject to the terms and conditions set out in this agreement, from month to month from the end of the fixed term until either the tenant gives notice that he wishes to end the agreement as set out in clauses 6 and 7 below or the landlord serves on the tenant a notice under section 21 of the housing act 1988, or a new form of agreement is entered into, or this agreement is ended by consent or court order" clause 6 and 7 talk about giving the landlord 1 months notice before I want to leave. Am I within my rights to ask to stay on a monthly rolling contract based on the above? Thanks -
Hi everyone. I'm a new member on here. I came across the site when researching tenancy deposit schemes and I've read through several threads but can't seem to find and guidance in relation to my particular problem. Briefly, in September of last year I agreed to rent a property with a private landlord. I had a few concerns about the property but the landlord assured me they would be dealt with once I moved in. But I needed somewhere to live quickly and my mother paid the deposit. The rent was to be paid by housing benefit. There was mould throughout the property, there was a leak from the soil stack or a blockage causing it to seep out from where the two pipes join, a couple of electrical sockets that were loose from the wall etc. I paid the deposit in cash and received a receipt. After several weeks the landlord had not repaired any of the above despite my texting and phoning him. At the same time he began to phone and text me demanding the rent but there was a delay at the housing benefit and the payment had not yet come through. He threatened in the text messages to come round to the property on specific dates and turf me out and take the keys back. I felt intimidated by him and told him by recorded delivery letter that I was going to give him 28 days notice to leave because he hadn't fixed any of the things he had promised. He had no problem with this and texted the sooner the better and that he still hadn't had the rent. I left the property and asked him for the deposit back and he said he was keeping it because he was still owed money. I then found out online that the deposit should have been protected. I asked him about this so that it could go to a resolution but he would not give me the details but kept on saying that he had protected it. He then came back to me and said that I owed him four months rent for leaving early, fees that he had paid to an electrician to fix a pendant - which was one of the jobs I had asked him to fix - fees for a skip to empty the property even though it was empty when I left etc. I realise I'm rambling on. What I'm trying to determine is whether the tenancy was valid when he didn't protect the deposit? Has he a right to claim back four months rent from me when he didn't protect the deposit in the first place? Did the agreement lose any legitimacy when he failed to do that? I ask because despite my continued asking him he will not return the deposit and I'm thinking about taking it to court. All I want is my deposit back. Nothing else. He has since had the back payments up until the time I left the property. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks -
I had a personal loan from 1999 which had PPI on it. I didn't request PPI but the box on the CCA had a pre-printed tick in it. On challenging the PPI, Paragon claim the loan wasn't dependent on PPI and that they weren't regulated at the time so I have no claim against them. The FOS haven't been much help. I've read a thread by user justice4me from 2012 where they managed to successfully make a PPI claim in much the same situation. Does anyone have any information regarding what is needed to successfully make a PPI claim against Paragon? Cheers, OMWO -
Hi there I have a question relating to a loan that I took in 2004 through Zenith Windows to install double glazing. But Zenith windows went into administration in 2010 I believe. Loan amount 5K. It is now paid off. How do I go about getting the PPI back from them and the unfair charges. Can anyone help please? Many thanks and much appreciated.
-
The Great Repeal Bill – which does the opposite of what it says http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-great-repeal-bill-parliament-brexit-negotations-deal-a7837616.html One of the key points in the Brexit referendum and since has been the returning of power to the elected British Parliament YET the great repeal bill - includes a part which effectively gives absolute power to the PM and a handful of her senior ministers COMPLETELY bypassing the British democratic process. "The Great Repeal Bill proposes to delegate power to Government in the form of a Henry VIII clause which will enable Government to change all EU-derived primary and secondary law by means of a secondary act (usually a statutory instrument) with limited or no Parliamentary scrutiny or oversight. In the second of her two posts on the Bill, Joelle Grogan argues that this runs counter to democracy, legal certainty, the rule of law and the ultimate supremacy of Parliament itself." http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/06/05/the-not-so-great-repeal-bill-part-2-how-henry-viii-clauses-undermine-parliament/ This should be opposed with your every breath whatever your beliefs on Brexit or ANY other subject. I have no real issue with the main part - bringing required EU legislation into British Law, ONLY with the complete negating of British democracy which May has bolted on to it - Which I unequivocally oppose. -
Martin Lewis of MSE. Listening to the radio whilst in the car and Martin Lewis was being interviewed - he mentioned that if you even have one drink whilst on holiday, it could invalidate any insurance claim.. I did a googly when I got home and yep... he says it again HERE If you've had even ONE drink, it can invalidate any claim -
I have been on work related ESA for about a year or so, my adviser has been pusihing me to volunteer at a charity shop and I have. But it isn't my anxiety that's effecting me. I have trapped wind(very painful and makes me sick) so had a blood test and was diagnosed with a failing thyriod, no medication given yet. When I first went onto ESA before the interview to determine where I go, I wrote down trapped wind. But was not allowed to put that down on my sick note. With my thyriod problem it has casued me to suffer from on/off depression, I have anxiety which makes me sick. I am due for another blood test for diabetes as my blood sugar was high last week. I didn't know that my thyriod was the reason why I am always tired and sometimes depressed. Can I add these to my ESA claim? My adviser thinks anxiety is curable and I should get over it. Not in that way, but she thinks I'm ready to work. I have never worked and I never pass an interview. -
OK last year i set up a monthly DD to pay my car road tax. This has been paid every single month and i have never missed a payment. At the beginning of April i received a letter saying my car was not taxed the letter was dated around the middle of march. I checked my bank and found the DD for April had been paid so i assumed it must have been a mistake. I just received a second letter telling me my car was not taxed so this time i checked online and it shows my car as being not taxed. There is no reason why my car tax is not taxed. The monthly DD is still being paid and has never failed the M.O.T was renewed in March 2017 1 week before the old M.O.T was due to expire and the insurance has just been renewed a few days ago. I dont know who to contact to sort this out as all the phone numbers seem to be automated and im now worried about being finned for a mistake that is clearly the DVLA's fault. Any advice please? Thanks -
I'll try to cut a long story short. Yesterday a good friend with own business wanted cash to buy car today. No time to go to bank due to work pressure, so online transferred £7000 to me. I rang Lloyds to make sure ok to withdraw £7000 and they said yes with my id. I went to branch with my driving licence to withdraw cash. Computer said "no". Branch official needed paper statement from my friend. Friend and I met at branch around 4.15pm. Friend had brought statement showing online transfer but bank wanted actual bank statement. Friend and I walk to his Barclays bank to get statement but he'd left his bank card at home (10 miles away). They couldn't help him get a statement without bank card!!! Back to Lloyds. Offered to show clerk phone statement but not good enough as she wanted paper receipt. Couldn't offer us internet access to print it out. Branch closed at 5pm. Back to my house to online transfer £7000 back to friend. Computer said "no" again I rang enquiry line. Several questions later (which I correctly answered) I was told go back to branch with photo id in order to allow transaction to go through!!! Tried logging onto internet banking to check my statement and it's been frozen. Rang enquiry line and was told go to branch with photo id!!! Branch closed today (Good Friday). So car sale fallen through for friend. The two of us will turn up tomorrow at my branch so wish me luck
-
For the full story - https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/24/broadband-users-in-line-for-millions-in-ofcom-compensation-plan
-
I have been sacked one and a half weeks into a two-week trial period. The employer says that, because I only worked for a short period, he doesn't have to deduct tax and Ni from my wages. I was working a 37-hour week for which my pay (due at the end of March) was £7.50 per hour. My employer confirmed this in an email to me before I started work. I was directly employed (not through an agency) and was not self-employed. My questions is this: Is the employer legally obliged to deduct tax and NI after such a short period and does he have to give me a P45? Also, what can I do if he doesn't do any of this? I am from Eastern Europe and feel that the employer is deliberately attempting to recruit EU citizens for a short period and avoiding his legal obligations to pay tax and NI. There was nothing wrong with my work. I believe that it was all along his intention to sack me and that this is ongoing company policy towards temporary employees. Your help on this would be much appreciated. -
Ryanair has told lawyers acting for a woman claiming compensation that it will no longer accept the jurisdiction of the English courts, in a case that has raised concerns over air passenger delay rights. The claims management company acting for a woman known only as Ms Menditta, who claimed against the Dublin-based Ryanair after a delay in 2015, have been told by the airline that a clause in the airline’s terms and conditions requires disputes to be decided by the Irish courts. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/dec/09/ryanair-says-womans-delay-claim-must-go-through-irish-courts Clause 2.4 of Ryanair's terms and conditions states that contract disputes will normally be subject to the jurisdiction of Irish courts, but until now has rarely invoked that clause. Ryanair has now declared it WILL recognise the jurisdiction of British courts in flight delay compensation cases, but only if customers shun third-party claims firms and approach the airline directly. -
I've read a fair few posts about ignoring these letters and all but would like to know if my situation is any different. I set off the security things on my way out from work one night (I used to work at TkMaxx) and we couldn't find what set the beeping off. I later phoned back to say i'd found a soft tag that i'd been playing with stuck to my magnetic name badge. The only thing bothering them was that i had a top in my bag that i had no receipt for. The last purchase i made was for a grey vest and the top i had in my bag was white with black sleeves. i had had an accident with makeup in my bag and rolled up this vest with the top i grabbed from home to protect it as i was intending to return it.... long story short (and the details dont particularly matter) they dragged out this 'investigation' for about 2 weeks, during which i was obviously suspended. my anxiety was through the roof. during my final disciplinary he had said to me that he did not feel that i had sufficiently explained the incident and that based on those grounds he was going to dismiss me for gross misconduct. he did not once say 'yes we believe you have stolen it' or 'yes we are 100% certain you have stolen' he just said he didn't feel my explanation was good enough. fair enough, i wanted to leave anyway. i did not enjoy working for them. HOWEVER. during my disciplinary, i was in a holding room and pointed to the RLP poster on the wall (as i had heard about them from researching before my disciplinary) and asked the note-taker (a Team Leader at TkMaxx) whether or not i would have to pay a fine as I had heard the LP next door dial RLP on speakerphone...... He said to me, 'i don't think so, otherwise you would have been informed and they would have mentioned it today' and i never thought anything else about it. Fast forward to now and i've just started an apprenticeship (so will be on waaay lower wages) and i've just got a RLP letter through the door that first of all says LETTER BEFORE CLAIM at the top and then says: Value of goods which was not recovered: £7.99 Contribution towards the cost of the time spent investigating blah blah blah £197.50 TOTAL £205.49 I'm panicking, my anxiety is starting to rise and i'm just worried about whether or not my situation is any different? Will i have to pay this? will they press charges because i worked there?? I will not be able to afford it either way :/ and i'm 23 btw -
READ MORE HERE: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37978589
-
Hi all. I have a good friend who just happened to mention in conversation two weeks ago that he is using a claim firm (that he heard advertised on the local radio) to make a claim on a loan he had years ago. My wife says that my face was a picture at that very moment. Needless to say, I spent about 15 minutes going over the reasons why he should do it himself:wink: He added that they had told him that there was PPI on a loan back in 1994. However, yesterday my friend said that the firm had been in contact and said that the bank had said that the PPI had been taken off after 30 days of the loan starting. I am now going to help my friend send a SAR, along with the £10. My question is - has it ever been know for banks to claim something like this but then when challenged for the proof, show otherwise? -
http://news.sky.com/story/fca-says-750000-mortgage-customers-could-net-compensation-payout-10623570 I dont think this is or was a blunder - it was a deliberate action by the mortgage companies.
-
In 2013 I had to give up work due to chronic ill health, I notified HMRC of my changed circumstances and my tax credits claim ended. Around six months later, I received a letter from HMRC stating I had been over paid by £3,500. I called them and after explaining my circumstances they agreed to suspend repayment, they didn't say for how long, just to expect further contact in future. I have since heard nothing from them. About a month ago, out of the blue I received a letter from a debt collector agency called LCS demanding repayment, I contacted HMRC and on asking why they had not contacted me directly, I was told it was normal practice to pass debt over to a DCA who would then pass it back to them on receiving proof of inability to pay and I could expect this to happen each year. After receiving a further two threatening letters from LCS, the last being a “notice of further action” I again contacted HMRC. This time they claimed to have contacted me a number of times and as I had failed to respond they had put recovery in the hands of LCS. They flatly refused to deal with me saying I must deal only with LCS. I have read posts on here advising never to contact a DCA. I'm confused and anxious as to what I can to do if HMRC refuse to deal with it. I'm very worried about this debt and its beginning to affect my already poor health. I hope someone can advise me on the best course of action.
-
Hi Everyone, About 3 weeks ago I bought some vitamins with a total value of £37 off Ebay from a US seller on the 1st November which was fully tracked to my door. A week ago I realised it hadn't turned up yet, so checked the online tracking only to find that it showed the item as being delivered on the 12th when it most certainly was not. I complained to the Ebay seller and got not reply, and when I lodged an Ebay dispute, they ruled in favour of the seller because the item was marked as delivered. I complained to Citipost about this who said they contacted Yodel who they subcontracted it out to who said that the item was delivered to my address at the time stated and that they have tracking location information from the driver to prove that, although I don't quite know what that proves, other than than he was at my location, especially as I live in a 21 storey tower block with 126 flats. Citipost are absolving themselves of responsiblity by saying: "you may or may not be aware that we are a mailing house only and as such have no control over any courier group your seller decides to utilize with his contractual partner." Yet I am a bit confused as to how they can claim this as the tracking information leads me to Citipost's tracking site, not Yodels, which on the tracking info is the subcontractor. I could swallow the £37 but it really is a matter of principle and I am absolutely furious about this, especially as Citipost scores a dismal 2.9/10 in their Trustpilot reviews. I would have no hesitation in taking them to the small claims court if I had a case, but I don't know if I do, because how do I prove that is was not delivered? But the fact that they are saying it was leaves me with no other comeback. The only thing I could use as proof that I don't go around making false claims is the fact that a few weeks ago, I lodged another missing claim for an item with another Ebay seller which turned up after the seller had sent a replacement, and the second it did, I contacted the seller to pay for it, proof of which is contained within my Ebay account. Does anyone have any advice on what I could do in this situation? Thanks. -
A study by Checkmarx and AppSec Labs specifically looked at the security of hundreds of the most popular apps found in the respective platforms’ app stores, testing them for security risks and vulnerabilities. According to the report, 40 percent of the iOS apps tested were found to have vulnerabilities rated as “critical” or “high severity.” Android apps fared marginally better at 36 percent. Android isn't that far behind, but this is 'another' one in the eye for those that continually brag Apple are safer. -
In brief - We went to a local independent flooring company, wishing to purchase a wood floor. The owner talked us through the various products, came to our house to look at the area it was for, measured up, checked the subfloor etc. He then recommended a product for us, ordered it and arranged for "his team" to come out and fit. He arranged the day and time they were to come out and told us that we should pay them cash on the day. In the meantime, he took moisture readings, spoke to the manufacturer and also the manufacturer of the underfloor heating we'd had put down, to check what underlay might be needed. The floor was fitted by "his team" - his brother and another man. It subsequently failed 4 times in the course of a year. The first 2 attempts to remedy the problems were made by the fitters. After it went wrong the 3rd time, it came to light that the fitters and the company owner had parted company, so the company owner/supplier came out and attempted to repair it. The same thing happened again, and he came out again. At this point, the supplier offered us a replacement stair carpet for our trouble. We said that this was not necessary, but if the floor failed again, we would be seeking a refund. When it failed again, we requested our money back. The supplier agreed, minus fitting costs. When we argued, he withdrew his offer and offered us a replacement floor instead. We expressed our concern that we had no confidence he had the neccesary skills and knowledge to fit a floor, given our experience thus far. We then took advice from the CAB and wrote a letter before action, inviting the supplier to comment on what he believed to be the issue with the floor, and offering to go to mediation. He responded, trying to lay the blame on us with various spurious claims, including that the contracting of the fitters had nothing to do with him - since the receipt he issued clearly stated "supply only." We then wrote again, offering to have an expert inspection and report done on the floor, and asking that both parties share the cost in order to confirm what had caused the problems with the floor. He refused, saying the cost was too great in relation to the value of the floor. We once again gave him the opportunity to refund us, while warning him that he may be asked to pay the cost of the report, should we take our case to the small claims court and win. In order to ascertain whether we had a case, we had the expert inspection done. It found that the fitting was to blame for the issues, including inadequate moisture and humidity readings taken by the supplier. The expert contacted the supplier to find out exactly what prep he had carried out and the supplier told him. The report also queried the suitability of the product for the conditions of our property. Once again, we wrote to the supplier with details of the report's findings and requested a refund of both the flooring, fitting and cost of the report or we would have no choice but to take our case to the small claims. The supplier has not responded. We feel we have a strong case. However, our concern is that it may be thrown out on the basis that the receipt we were issued was for supply only. In the letters from the supplier, he does state that he tried to repair the floor on 2 occasions, hut says it was purely a good will gesture. However, he also states that he did the pre-fitting site visits and prep. So, what is our legal position regarding his responsibility for the fitting of the floor?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS