Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
  • 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

Am I committing benefit fraud?


yflad
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5582 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

Hello,

 

I was diagnosed with schizophrenia in May 2008 and have been signed off since December 2007, receiving Income Support and Housing Benefit.

 

I have attended several interviews at my Job Centre where the lady suggested I do some form of voluntary work as a therapeutic aid to my condition.

 

I did not want to do voluntary work as it meant leaving the house, so instead I set up an online magazine about travel and food with the help of my friend. I used to work as a journalist when I was well, and I have a stockpile of articles and photographs. I wanted something to do in my spare time.

 

However, a friend recently commented that my online magazine contains my name and looks very commercial and warned that if the DWP and Housing Benefit found out, they could mistakenly think I was committing benefit fraud. An advertising agency has now linked to my magazine and their website is full of expensive advertising rates.

 

This has caused me a lot of alarm, as it looks like I am the editor of a luxury, expensive magazine with lots of ad revenue. When in fact, the whole thing is a hobby and I have not made a penny out of the business, as my bank account will prove.

 

However, I am worried that I am already being investigated. It is simply a hobby and although I would have liked to make money out of it, I haven't. If I did make money, I would have stopped my benefits immediately.

 

Does anyone know what I should do? I don't want to remove my magazine from the internet because it took a long time to create and has received many good comments. It has also been very helpful dealing with my condition as it has occupied my time and helped me be more creative.

 

However, I don't want to lose my benefits and be taken to court for suspected benefit fraud when, in reality, I haven't committed this.

 

Please help.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't pretend this is expert advice, no doubt someone with good knowledge of the benefit system will be along, but I think the simplest thing to do would be to ask the Benefit office.

If you can prove you're not making money, then you can prove you're not committing fraud. If you were advised to undertake some theraputic voluntary work, all you've done is take up that adivce.

Call the Benefit office and run it by them. At the very least they'll see you're being up-front about it. Common sense?

 

As I said, not expert advice, but I hope it helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, expert advice from someone in the know and who owns a website...

 

An online presence does not automatically mean you are making money from it. They are not likely to stumble over your magazine but if they were then you could easily prove that you are not making any money from it.

 

Do you have adverts on your website?

Are you selling anything on it?

 

If those two are "No" then that's clear that you can't be making money from the magazine.

 

Links to websites that do make money means nothing.

 

Keep your website going. It's a hobby and you can prove it very easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what Insyder said.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you are not commiting benefit fraud. Unless you actually benefit financially yourself from the website there is no fraud going on.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I just wanted to thank everyone who took the time to respond - your help was greatly appreciated.

 

I have decided to continue with my internet project. I have been told by people that in the future they may advertise on my site, but if that does happen, I will obviously tell the DWP and the Council.

 

I am also going to write to the DWP and Council up front, just to tell them that I have an internet site which is a hobby but I don't make any money from it... I think it is better to be up front about it because at least in the future if a problem does arise, I will be able to prove that I have been honest and open with them.

 

Thanks again for your help and best wishes to you all

 

N.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not mention what type of benefit you are receiving. If it is JSA you have signed a commitment to be looking for work but if you are bilding a website then you cannot be actively looking for work. I would say it si a grey area. I almost fell into thsi category when i decided to do a course at the local college. I had to prove that I was still actively looking and availible for work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not mention what type of benefit you are receiving. If it is JSA you have signed a commitment to be looking for work but if you are bilding a website then you cannot be actively looking for work.

I was diagnosed with schizophrenia in May 2008 and have been signed off since December 2007, receiving Income Support and Housing Benefit.
Nevertheless, if it were JSA having a hobby is not in itself incompatible with looking for work as well. You don't have to spend every minute looking.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all that's been stated..........however if they discover your running a website they will probably stop your benefit until you can prove your not receiving any kind of payment.

 

So I'm afraid the dilemma is yours do you or don't you tell them now. Only you can know if you will be able to manage if they do stop your benefits until you prove your situation

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all that's been stated..........however if they discover your running a website they will probably stop your benefit until you can prove your not receiving any kind of payment.

 

No they won't. They can only suspend benefit if they have reasonable doubt or proof. The onus is on them to prove it, and they won't suspend your benefit just because you own a website.

 

I also agree with Zamzara. You need to be actively seeking work but you can do what you like in the evenings as long as you are proving that you are following the Jobseekers Agreement and looking for full-time work.

 

Surfer01 has come up against the part-time education problem which says that you need to be doing under 16 hours a week, it needs to be specified as a part-time course, that you need to be actively seeking and available for work and that you must give the course up in the event that a suitable job is offered.

 

Not the same as a hobby at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insyder clearly you & I live in different worlds because in mine the benefits agency will stop benefits based on the slightest whiff that there might be a fraud being committed.

 

Also unlike innocent until proven guilty in the case of the SS your guilty until proven innocent

 

Don't believe me then read the many threads of those who come here having unjustly had their benefits stopped.

 

My advice is tell them & that avoids any later misunderstanding...........but if they do that merely confirms my position

Link to post
Share on other sites

We do live in different worlds, JonCris.

 

The DWP (not the benefits agency) will not suspend a claim because someone is running a website. There must be reasonable doubt before they will even take up a case.

Edited by insyder
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your work may involve the DWP but then so does mine albeit on a voluntary basis & I'm constantly confronted by victims of DWP almost daily where their benefits have been stopped until AFTER they investigate the veracity of the allegations or suspicions

 

Also if you have an interest in the system as you work in it do you not read the many threads on this & other sites where just such a thing has happened to claimants ............'Guilty' until proven innocence is the mantra of the DWP I'm afraid

 

They 'invite' claimants for interview under caution & without benefit of legal counsel advising the claimant that they don't need legal representation which of course is blatant nonsense & an abuse of process

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi need some advice made redundant on contribution based jobseekers allowence my partner is in part time employment 27hrs per week.advised not entitled to help with mortgage due to my partners hours d w p state that my partner is full tie as she works more than 24 hrs .cannot get tax credits as my partner works less than 30 hrs so for this she is classed as part time.mortage arrears acumalating im signed with a agencey for work .help advice welcome how do i aproach it

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's alleged that the DWP are even trawling through their own members of staff in an attempt to find those who's benefits they can stop based on the slightest excuse

 

 

"alleged" is the key word here.

 

Everyone has differing views on any public body, be it the DWP or the Local Authority. Some think it's the staff, not trained well enough, some think it's the staff ignoring the rules and regs and being generally difficult, abusing their powers, some think it's the customers saying something then backtracking, some say it's the customers blatantly lying or failing to provide info that is required/requested.

 

Either way a balance will never be struck with accusations flying around and each blaming the other. Guilty until proven innocent is not the mantra of DWP by any means, if you are working assisting people, Jon Cris then you would or should be aware of the courses of action the DWP should be following (which is not guilty until proven innocent), and if it is not being adhered to by a staff member, it should be followed up by way of a complaint to a senior member of staff within DWP. It may be the mantra of certain individuals but it is not the mantra of the DWP as a whole.

 

There are rules and regs set down in any job which should be adhered to, particularly when it is a public body and if one member of staff (or several) break away from the cart as it were, it needs to be brought forward (through an MP if necessary). I'm not saying it doesn't happen, (everyone knows of people who do not apply the correct procedures) I am saying it shouldn't happen and if it is happening to you or someone whom you represent it needs to be brought forward.

 

I myself have been investigated several times (not by DWP but the Inland Revenue - different body, same government) for tax credit fraud. Every time without cause or reasonable belief - I have no idea WHY to this day investigations have been carried out. In all cases I have provided all information requested of me and complied fully and in all cases I have had letters confirming their investigations to reveal there is nothing untoward going on. At no point during the investigation processes were my tax credits halted.

 

At the end of the day people have differing opinions on here as they do outside the forum, but we are all here for one of two reasons: To help others, and to help ourselves. Have a difference of opinion guys, but there is no point in arguing over who is right and who is wrong, that doesn't help the consumer unless there is fact to back it up and do something about it.

 

Incidentally, having a website does NOT in any way, shape or form constitute fraud unless finances are gained from the website or it is interfering with ones agreement to be available for work. Having said that, if the OP is upfront about it from the start it stops worrying about it later.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I have been working as self employed with my soon to be X husband for the past 7 ish yrs within his business. I have NEVER had a wage neither going into my bank account or in hand ! i have now got a feeling that he has not pad his tax over this time and am wondering if anyone can help me as 2 where i will stand if he is reported an "done" for this. As i have not been taking any wage from him where do i stand in all of this ? help much welcomed

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAN SOMEONE HELP WITH THIS ??

 

Hi. I have been working as self employed with my soon to be X husband for the past 7 ish yrs within his business. I have NEVER had a wage neither going into my bank account or in hand ! i have now got a feeling that he has not pad his tax over this time and am wondering if anyone can help me as 2 where i will stand if he is reported an "done" for this. As i have not been taking any wage from him where do i stand in all of this ? help much welcomed

Link to post
Share on other sites

erika in a perfect world I would agree with you But to my certain knowledge not only are your comments inaccurate they also ignore the evidence splattered all over forums such as this. Furthermore the miscreants I refer to aren't junior but very senior

 

Also if all's well can you tell us why claimants invited for questioning 'under caution' are always told they don't need legal representation or if charges are made they are under sec12 thereby denying the defendant rights to trial by jury.

 

& whilst your at it can you tell my why benefit claimants are prosecuted & convicted even where there is no loss to the Treasury in other words simply for claiming the 'wrong' benefits & not as claimed fleecing the system

Edited by JonCris
Link to post
Share on other sites

& to continue In a recent case a benefit claimant was pilloried in the press for claiming benefits & buying a flash car

 

The money for the car was from a trust set up when he was awarded damages. He perfectly entitled in law to use the money to purchase capital goods & in fact had he done otherwise he would have forfeited ALL benefits to which he was entitled. Something that the press ignored because it doesn't make good copy and which the DWP made much of whilst knowing full well he wasn't commiting any offence OR abusing the system

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon, I can't answer the why's, because the only person who can answer that is the person responsible for it.

 

My comments are not inaccurate thank you, if you read my post fully you would see that I stated quite clearly:

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, (everyone knows of people who do not apply the correct procedures) I am saying it shouldn't happen and if it is happening to you or someone whom you represent it needs to be brought forward.
The mantra of DWP is NOT "guilty until proven innocent" but some people interperet things to suit themselves and if someone in the DWP has done this in order to cast someone as guilty and not allowing them the opportunity to show their innocence, it needs to be dealt with as it is not the way the DWP wants things to work. It is therefore the mantra of certain individuals not DWP itself.

 

I do not for one moment deny this happens, everyone knows it happens and happens far too often than is acceptable, but that does not change the fact that a group of people incapable of performing their jobs correctly does not make everyone in the department incapable of doing their jobs correctly. I have come across many a person employed in the DWP who is a jumped up little jobsworth however I have also come across people who will go above and beyond what is expected to provide a customer with a high level of customer service, and would not label the DWP as a whole, incapable.

 

Senior Officials within the department as you mention are the worst breed, they are most usually the ones who have their fancy shmancy job titles rammed that far up their backsides that they don't concern themselves with the job in hand, they need to be brought to book, granted.

 

Exchanging arguments is not helping anyone here, nor is making the presumption that because someone does not agree with you that they are an employee of the department, and singling them out as the enemy (leaving them open to possible attack by other Caggers) when they have come here to help people. Someone with knowledge to the inner workings of a department does not automatically make them an employee. People in the Debt forum know the inner workings of DCA's and the regulations that are supposed to be adhered to. The majority of people posting there have never seen the inside of a DCA - they just happen to be educated on the subject, or perhaps have inside contacts like many of us do.

Edited by ErikaPNP
ooh, spelling mistake, naughty me!

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree JonCris, the DWP fraud and overpayment departments are very different from the rest, and are notoriously much more anti-user.

 

There is a fantastic smackdown of the DWP in a decision by Commissioner Williams here.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...