Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

HELP...Are there guidline for DCA's deailing with Mental Health Patients


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5513 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

First may I say this is a fantastic site, have learned an awful lot from it. I need some advise.

 

 

OH had been in business for many years. He was successful and careful with finances both business and personal. Business now in liquidation, but this is another story – untrustworthy business partner, recession etc.,:evil: but has played part in our current personal situation.

 

 

OH suffered breakdown. He has been diagnosed with mental health condition. .

 

OH signed hire purchase (out of character), which he could not afford, has since been repossed, BOS are requesting the shortfall of £20k, amazing only had the car 6 months and they managed to sell if for £20k less. They wouldn’t allow us to sell it privately.

 

 

 

Our family home had to be sold (threats of repossession), considerably less than what we paid for it 6 years ago, no equity remaining. We are now in rented accommodation, husband and I receiving incap benefit.

 

 

The credit card & HP companies are aware of our situation and OH state of health, the CAB have written to all creditors and they had all agreed £1 token payments from him. But today we have received a letter from Link Financial introducing themselves and requesting the full amount. This is on behalf of MBNA who OH never signed a CCA with, we believe it could have been another card which he got through PC World. I am sending the CCA request to them Monday with PO of £1, something I wasn't aware of until I found CAG. :)

 

 

What I really want to know is how are the DCA’s with people who have mental health issues, (oh has attempted suicide on 2 occasions due to all above issues, which his care worker has informed the banks of in writing). I understand the DCA’s can be quite heavy and even go so far as to flout the law, but I would like to hear from anyone who can enlighten me as to, what they can and can not do.:confused:

 

 

I have a property which I get a rental income from due to switching to interest only payment so get some income, this does have a large mortgage, can’t sell now as negative equity. Can his creditors try and apply a charging order on this. The property is in my name and has always been in my name, I know that if you were going through divorce proceedings then husband could claim half but can the DCA’s try and claim from my income or my assets for his debt. Also does my rental income/beneifts have to be included in his personal financial statement.:confused:

Any advice would be much appreciated.:)

 

Another question : the HP company sold the car for £20k less than the loan. They never gave us the option for private sale.

 

Would it be unreasonable to approach the HP company and point out that Husband was suffering mental health condition so was therefore not in a position/the right state of mind to understand the terms and conditions (had underaken an unregulated credit agreement at that time). Thefore suggest that as they had taken back the vehicle could they not write off the rest of the outstanding balance. I know that the car could have been sold privately for a lot more than they did at auction.

Edited by joemay
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi joemay,

 

Here's the CSA code of conduct section that applies to your question:

 

L)Have due regard and deal sensitively with individuals where evidence has been given, or is apparent, that the individual is incapacitated by mental or physical disability.

 

Full code here:

 

http://www.csa-uk.com/csa/code-of-practice.php

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having been in your position personally, albeit without 'an other half' I can empathize with your situation.

 

Firstly, any benefit you or your husband received as a direct consequence of your illnesses cannot be taken into account as 'income'. These Benefits are considered legally to be solely for the management of your 'disability'.

 

I would presume that DCA's are well aware of that fact and are only too aware that Judges' are too. It is therefore not in their best interests to take either of you to Court.

 

Having said that, I have spent many years 'fighting' the DCA's off, and, as you say despite confirmation of your illnesses, they still harrass you. In the end, I wrote to each and every one and CCA'd them. Most have been unable to produce the correct documentation. Those that think they did comply, I wrote and told I would offer £1 a month for the rest of my life. I am over Pension Age and I am never going to be in a better position, through age and health. I suggested that if they think they can get more, go ahead and issue proceeding in Court, where I would be able to show all the 'helpful' correspondence I have sent to them, and the Judge would only be able to award £1 per month because of illness and benefits.

 

Not an ideal solution, but there is light at the end of the tunnel. The only fly in the ointment that I can see is the rental property you own. So least said soonest mended.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I would love to say that DCA's treat people with mental health problems with sympathy but I can't.

I have seen times when the DCA will treat mental health as an excuse not to pay and deal with it in an underhand and illegal way. They are the lowest form of business and so long as you are suffering, they are happy.

 

The only way to deal with these people is to go on the offensive once they try to get heavy.

Never speak to them on the phone. They will lie,cheat and bully you. Only ever deal with them in writing.

Get your husbands permission to handle his affairs with Link otherwise they won't deal with you(assuming you ever have to speak to them).

 

No DCA can take your income into account (although they will try to make it appear so) as it's your husbands debt.

 

If link try to phone you, get a telephone recorder and make sure you use it. Refuse to answer security questions and then link can't go any further. If the did they would be flouting the data laws.

 

My sympathies are with you

 

 

fox

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

harrassed senior - Sorry to hear that you have suffered.

My debt is manageable, and I will be making arrangement with my creditors. But am right in thinking that my husband's creditors can not come to me for his debt i.e. trying to get a charging order put on the property, bearing in mind that the house is in my name only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks silverfox.

I intend on fighting his corner. CAB have dealt with his creditors so far, but they are snowed under and are unable to respond or deal with issues immediately. A few months ago just wanted to sit in a corner and hide, but since i've found CAG, it's like someone rang the bell and I'm coming out fighting;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two schools of thought: don't give them the leverage by telling them; the other is to assert rights under section 19 of the DDA and threaten a counter-claim for damages under section 25.

 

Sorry, but all this is new to me, what is DDA?:?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that's the second time in half an hour, someone's asked what I meant by an abbreviation I'd used thoughtlessly!

 

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

 

Section 19 is the obligation on providers of services to make reasonable adjustments.

 

The reasonable adjustment you would want them to make is to deal with you as your husband's agent and/or to deal only in writing.

 

Section 25 gives a right to claim damages - not megabucks (the going rate for even successful claims seems to be £500-£3000) but another handy weapon to use in appropriate cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question : the HP company sold the car for £20k less than the loan. They never gave us the option for private sale.

 

Would it be unreasonable to approach the HP company and point out that Husband was suffering elated stage of Bi-polar so was therefore not in a position/the right state of mind to understand the terms and conditions and cca at that time. Thefore suggest that as they had taken back the vehicle could they not write off the rest of the outstanding balance. I know that the car could have been sold privately for a lot more than they did at auction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that's the second time in half an hour, someone's asked what I meant by an abbreviation I'd used thoughtlessly!

 

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

 

Section 19 is the obligation on providers of services to make reasonable adjustments.

 

The reasonable adjustment you would want them to make is to deal with you as your husband's agent and/or to deal only in writing.

 

Section 25 gives a right to claim damages - not megabucks (the going rate for even successful claims seems to be £500-£3000) but another handy weapon to use in appropriate cases.

 

 

Another question : the HP company sold the car for £20k less than the loan. They never gave us the option for private sale.

 

Would it be unreasonable to approach the HP company and point out that Husband was suffering elated stage of Bi-polar so was therefore not in a position/the right state of mind to understand the terms and conditions and cca at that time. Thefore suggest that as they had taken back the vehicle could they not write off the rest of the outstanding balance. I know that the car could have been sold privately for a lot more than they did at auction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Firstly, any benefit you or your husband received as a direct consequence of your illnesses cannot be taken into account as 'income'. These Benefits are considered legally to be solely for the management of your 'disability'.

 

 

Where is this imformation from? Is it in a legal document or guidelines book?

Also are you talking about DLA or IB

 

I only ask as my position is very similar, my wife claims Long term IB for both of us due to her depression and disabilties, but the debts are in my name, joint account ect.

 

But the DCA's persist in saying it is all 'our' income.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DLA is definitely excluded.

 

Both National Debtline and CCCS have something about this in their guidelines on preparing income and expenditure statements. There are two methods of dealing with it: either you exclude the DLA from income or you include it but cancel it out with a corresponding entry under expenditure for care costs.

 

IB is, I think, to be included as it is an income replacement benefit but I am prepared to be corrected on that.

 

The latter is consistent with the approach taken in relation to the calculation of means-tested benefits in which a disregard is applied to DLA "income".

 

As for what DCAs say (or even insist), bear in mind that they have been known - at least on occasion - to speak with forked tongues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for what DCAs say (or even insist), bear in mind that they have been known - at least on occasion - to speak with forked tongues.

 

I totally concur.

 

I have in my possession a letter from Lowlifes in Leeds and they state that they can use ALL income to evaluate a payment plan even after I told them they shouldn't be using DLA as that was protected income. Forked tongue indeed.

 

fox

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...