Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Age discrimination at Doctor


Madamfluff
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5547 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

My elderly parents - 78 and 79 have had a problem in getting to see their GP, when they make appointments they are told they can only see the practise nurse and all attempts at getting GP appointment have been refused by the surgery, I phoned the surgery this morning to complain about this and was told that if I complained they would take my parents of their list

I know they can take people of the surgery list without giving a reason, but I believe its due to age discrimination ( and therefore illegal) and I want to challenge them, I would like to have facts and figures with me when I go down to see them

 

Can anyone help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, unless you have more than a belief that they are discriminating, you are not going to get very far.

 

What is the reason being given for refusing a GP appointment? A lot of things are being routinely handled by the nurse at my surgery.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No reason given my parents are happy to see a practise nurse for blood tests etc but want to see their GP about other things and I am sorry a PN may miss something that a GP will pick up on, I have also looked at the web site that advises GPs on removing a patient and they are not allowed to unless they give a warning ( unless there is violence ) and certainly cannot do so due to age or 'cost'

 

Any way ( and I am sorry if people dont agree with me) my parents have paid into the NHS are are bleddy entitled nto see a GP if they want

 

From Cradle to Grave is what the NHS promised

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, after the treatment my parents received from my local hospital, I too believe that age discrimination is alive and kicking in the NHS, but like Bookworm says, you need to prove it.

Can you make the appointment on behalf of your mum or dad? If the appointment is refused ask why and to whom you are speaking so that you can challenge it in writing to head of practice.

Don't let your parents be threatened into not making a complaint.

One thing I've learned over the last few years is that there is definitely no such thing as an expert. Even if you think the GP will know more than the PN, they both don't know everything. You should never be embarrassed to return to the doctor several times and ask for a second opinion if you feel your 'problem' is not being dealt with effectively.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no prohibition on age discrimination in the context of provision of goods or services. There is no basis to complain about this in law.

 

It might be worth looking at changing GP.

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there is no such law at present, but if the GP is turning elderly patients away because of their age, it is discrimination. Why should they change their GP? It may be close by and convenient. Challenge what is unacceptable. If this is age discrimination, I would be making a formal complaint. Perhaps 'phone Age Concern to see whether they have any advice. The goal should be to make age discrimination as unacceptable to the public psyche as race and sex discrimination.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there is no such law at present, but if the GP is turning elderly patients away because of their age, it is discrimination. Why should they change their GP? It may be close by and convenient. Challenge what is unacceptable. If this is age discrimination, I would be making a formal complaint. Perhaps 'phone Age Concern to see whether they have any advice. The goal should be to make age discrimination as unacceptable to the public psyche as race and sex discrimination.

 

The point is though, that at present, it is not unacceptable. What do you feel will be gained from a formal complaint? Attitudes don't change because of letters, they change because of laws.

 

SV

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I phoned the surgery today to make an appointment for my dad, didnt say what it was for and was offered an appointment with the PN, I refused this and was told by the surgery - Mrxxxx always sees the PN. I said this time MRxxx will see the GP, The receptionist then asked to speak to my father as a 'matter of confidentialty' as she need to ask him what the problem was, I refused point blank and told her we would not be discussing my dads problem with her only with the GP and if she didnt make an appointment we would be taking up the matter with the the local health authority and we also go straight to the surgery and demand to see a GP Dad has an appointment with GP on Monday, he has trouble with his sight and his optician has told him to see his GP as it may be that wet eye problem that was in the papers recently, but I want him checked out and referred to an eye specialist if need be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seftonview

Age discrimination is accepted because of the following

1. Old people dont contest things as they are bought up not to make a fuss and to treat doctors and the like as 'authority figures.'

2 Young people dont give a damn as they cant percieve themselves as ever getting old so it does not concern them

3. It is people like me in middleage who tend to make a stand as we know we will be in the same situation in 10 - 20 years

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you madamfluff. As the optician is unsure of the eye disorder, he rightly referred your dad to his GP. Your GP can refer him to a specialist. It sounds rather like the PN is filtering the GPs appointments. I'm sure there are a great many problems that they can deal with, but ultimately it should be an absolute right for the patient to make the appointment with the GP. I wish your dad well.

 

Seftonview, silence gives consent. There is, I believe an Equality Bill in process. My attitude towards descrimination is already formed, I do not need a law to know right from wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What Seftonview is trying to say, I think, is that you said in your first post:

but I believe its due to age discrimination ( and therefore illegal)
and he is pointing out that in law at this point, there is no such thing as age discrimination outside of work. So no, the alleged discrimination of which you complain is not illegal.

 

Therefore, any complaint of age discrimination to the surgery would fail in law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go for it, and complain to your MP, or anyone who will listen. GP's get paid a fortune, and pick and choose who they will see. It is wrong to do this, and I have had problems with my GP when my mum was alive and she was unwell, but would not complain or say anything.

It takes us, their next of kin to take up the mantle and fight for fair treatment for everyone, no matter who you are.

It really makes me mad to hear about this behaviour:evil:

Good luck in your fight

LilythePink

If you liked what I said, and if it helped in any way, please tip my scales..... thank you:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What Seftonview is trying to say, I think, is that you said in your first post:

and he is pointing out that in law at this point, there is no such thing as age discrimination outside of work. So no, the alleged discrimination of which you complain is not illegal.

 

Therefore, any complaint of age discrimination to the surgery would fail in law.

 

This is exactly the point I was making.

 

If the GPs "issue", for want of a better word, is with the patients age, as it stands he has done nothing wrong in law. I'm not advocating that is right or fair, but it is the way it is at present.

 

Seftonview, silence gives consent. There is, I believe an Equality Bill in process. My attitude towards descrimination is already formed, I do not need a law to know right from wrong.

 

I agree with you, I'm not advocating that discrimination is ever just, but in law there has been none. Challenging with the GP won't sway his opinion... it's difficult enough to force change where the law is on your side (and I speak as someone who is a minority group in four respects - disability, race, religion and sexual orientation); let alone when it is not.

 

Seftonview

Age discrimination is accepted because of the following

1. Old people dont contest things as they are bought up not to make a fuss and to treat doctors and the like as 'authority figures.'

2 Young people dont give a damn as they cant percieve themselves as ever getting old so it does not concern them

3. It is people like me in middleage who tend to make a stand as we know we will be in the same situation in 10 - 20 years

 

These are quite sweeping statements to make, and they aren't really accurate. I am a young person, and I do give a damn. I have a real appreciation of the difficulties various parts of society can face (see above), and I do work in my community as a volunteer to try and challenge and improve this. What I am advocating is that, as Uncle Remus would say, "we need to think with our heads rather than our feets."

 

SV

Edited by seftonview

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on a minute Seftonview. You earlier suggested that it may be an idea to change GPs. That sounds more like thinking with your feet than your head. You may think it not worthwhile to complain as it will not sway the GP, but challenging opinions and attitudes is a good thing. It makes us think and question ourselves...and just sometimes things may change for the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on a minute Seftonview. You earlier suggested that it may be an idea to change GPs. That sounds more like thinking with your feet than your head. You may think it not worthwhile to complain as it will not sway the GP, but challenging opinions and attitudes is a good thing. It makes us think and question ourselves...and just sometimes things may change for the better.

 

Ironically, moving on is thinking with your head in this case.

 

You can't force the GP not to discriminate in this instance, since he isn't breaking the law.

 

You can however, go to a GP with a better attitude and outlook.

 

SV

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, couldn't get to your Uncle Remus link to read the quote.

 

So, you move on to another GP and find he has the same outlook and attitude as the one you just left but now it takes two bus rides to get there. People aren't allowed to interview the head of practice before registering with a surgery; you just go to the nearest or most convenient. Madamfluff was told that if she complained her parents would be taken off the list. No way is that acceptable. If such a decision is not challenged, the GP practice will go on to treat others the same way - perhaps next time it will be your relative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sali, you are missing the point altogether.

 

Yes, this type of attitude should be challenged.

 

However, any challenge can only be successful if done the right way. Go in alleging age discrimination: no basis in law, challenge will fail. On the other hand, complain about the blackmail attempt (if you make a fuss, we'll kick you out) which can be acted upon, you are far more likely to get a result.

 

The danger is to let emotions cloud reason, MadamFluff wanted "facts and figures" to deal with them, this is what both Sefton and myself are doing.

 

If you read a few more of Sefton's posts, you will see that where there is a way to complain about discrimination, he will find it and help. So don't waste your anger on the wrong target. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us know how you get on. Remember, cold facts will get you listened to better than anger, so try to stay calm and collected (easier said than done, I know!).

 

Good luck. Your parents are lucky to have you to fight their corner. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bookworm, I'm not angry and at no time have I suggested any legal challenge - but I'd disagreed with Seftonview who suggested they might look for another GP and not bother with a formal complaint. I haven't suggested that madamfluff go in all guns blazing, but that she ask why her parents have been denied access to the GP and challenge it with head of practice if necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bookworm, I'm not angry and at no time have I suggested any legal challenge - but I'd disagreed with Seftonview who suggested they might look for another GP and not bother with a formal complaint. I haven't suggested that madamfluff go in all guns blazing, but that she ask why her parents have been denied access to the GP and challenge it with head of practice if necessary.

 

I understand your point of view, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

Even if the OP makes a complaint, and challenges the behaviour with the practice manager, it is very unlikely to change things. If it doesn't change things, what has been achieved? No apology will be forthcoming, because nothing wrong has been done. Even if it had been, in all of my experience of discrimination cases, admissions are never made. The OP probably won't feel any better, time will have been wasted on an unfruitful complant that was doomed to fail from the start.

 

I know it's a horrid situation, and the GP deserves a good dressing down, but I'm afriad he isn't likely to get one.

 

SV

If I've been helpful, please add to my rep. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on a minute, Are you sure the GP is even aware of this? Some receptionists seem to think that they can do what they like, some even think that answering a phone gives them the right to ask patients about their conditions. Every patient has a right to see the practitioner of their choice and doesn't have to give a reason why. The first thing they should do next time they ring up is take the receptionists name. They should then very politely ask to see a GP. if they get threatened again in this manner they should write a letter to the senior partner not the practice manager (another jumped up receptionist). This makes the doctors aware of what is happening. Most will be horrified to find out that their admin staff are behaving in this way. If there i no satisfactory answer I would then suggest writing to the PCT outlining your complaint and asking them to find you another GP. The practice you are currently at will have their wrists slapped big time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we went to the GP and what a blasted palava

 

First of all when we got there by Dad was told ( and in such a rude patronising manner) that his appointment was with the nurse and that if she felt that he needed to see a GP then she would refer him to one ( bad mistake lady) I gently and calmly hold her that Mr xxx appointment was with the GP not nurse and I had made the appointment myself , she argued but I was very polite and very very firm so in we goes to see the doctor despite being told by the receptionist that I could not go in with my Dad due to 'Medical Confidentiality' yeah and thats going to stop me is it?

 

The Doctor told dad it was old age and nothing he could do ( in other words go away old man) . I explained that the Optician thought it may be

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and that I wanted Dad to see a specialist as there are various treatments available for this and we needed to keep options open, although GP initally refused I persisted and Dad is going to Moorfields

 

I also asked him why it was his practises policy to ration elderly patients access to GPs , of course he denied there was such a policy and also denied that the reception would say a patient would be taken of the list if they complained - I left him in no doubt that I didnt believe a word and that I would be monitoring the situation

 

It is awful that elderly people are treated in this manner, I mean how many others have the same problem and dont have a relative or anybody to make a fuss on their behalf . I will be taking this up with Age Concern and getting advise also I think there is on old age tsar at least there was once I think it was Professor Phillips anyhow I will be looking into this

 

I have really got my Dander up about this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you madamfluff. I would have done exactly the same. I have accompanied my elderly relatives to their doctors and as long as the patient agrees that you can go in with them, there should be no argument from the GP.

You are quite right to have pushed for your dad to see an eye specialist. However, it is a concern that you had to. Age Concern will have heard thousands and thousands of tales like yours... and worse.

Dame Joan Bakewell has, I believe, been appointed tzar for the elderly. Apparently she has been deluged with communications from members of the public on the poor treatment of elderly people by our healthcare system.

I wish your dad well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...