Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted.
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

Tax Credits & Maternity Pay


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5385 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

I have recently given birth-31/3/2009 and wondered how my tax credits application will be processed?

 

I know normally it is based on earnings from the year before but I am only entitled to tax credits from 31/3/2009 as its my first child and if they base my payment on last years earnings then last years earnings are significantly lower than my statutory maternity pay.

 

On calling the tax credits they advised they would need to calculate my entitled on las years earnings then I would need to ring them up and say I was on maternity pay for them to make an amended calculation? Seems a bit pointless really?

 

Also does anyone know roughly, how long tax credits and child benefit claims take to process?

 

Many Thanks :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice to you would be to firstly make a claim for Child Benefit, as Tax Credits will try to match up your childs details with the Child Benefits systems, if there is no record of your child then your claim will probably be delayed.

 

They will calculate your claim on previous years earnings and what you've been told is right, you will then need to call back and give an estimate for the current tax year. What you need to take into account is the maternity pay though, for every week you are on maternity leave you deduct the first £100 of the pay (e.g if you went on maternity leave 10 weeks before th end of the tax year and were getting £117 per week, you would do £117 x 10 weeks = £1170 then take off £1000). A bit complicated i know but calculating the closest estimate possible is the best thing to do, it reduces the risk of an over payment.

 

Lastly, tax credits say it can take 3 weeks for a claim to be processed, this is only if there is no problems with any of the details, so technically there is no timescale. If you attach a covering letter to your claim form asking for your claim to be back dated to the date your baby was born then they will do this.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I started my mat leave on March 17th which means I can deduct three weeks in the last tax year then?

 

Also for this tax year, I will only be receiving smp nothing more.SMP is now £123.06 x 6 weeks is £4430.16, from that deduct 36 weeks x £100 which is £3600. That leaves my income of £830.16? Is that right?

 

Many Thanks for all your help :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, if you started maternity on 17/03/09 you would deduct 2 weeks from this tax year, so £200.

 

So then in new Tax Year you would do £123.06 x 37 weeks = £4553.22. £100 x 37 weeks = £3700.

£4553.22 - £3700 = £853.22 should be total income.

 

15/12/09 is when your 39 weeks maternity would be up, if you return to work on this date then you will also need to add to the £853.22 what you think you will earn in employment up to 05/04/2010. If you don't return to work on this date or before you will need to inform Tax Credits as they would then no longer class you as employed.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
No, if you started maternity on 17/03/09 you would deduct 2 weeks from this tax year, so £200.

 

So then in new Tax Year you would do £123.06 x 37 weeks = £4553.22. £100 x 37 weeks = £3700.

£4553.22 - £3700 = £853.22 should be total income.

 

15/12/09 is when your 39 weeks maternity would be up, if you return to work on this date then you will also need to add to the £853.22 what you think you will earn in employment up to 05/04/2010. If you don't return to work on this date or before you will need to inform Tax Credits as they would then no longer class you as employed.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Thank you so much for taking the time to work that out for me.

 

Cheers :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Sorry to barge in. I have phoned tax credits a number of times now and i'm getting different answers from them, so really confused :-(. Hope you can help.

 

I understand what you are saying above but tax credits are saying a little different to this for me..

 

They are working it out as still basing it on my full salary, not the amount it will drop while being on maternity. example.

 

Due to go on SMP April 2010 for 25 weeks.

Normal basic salary 23000

23000 - 2500 = 20500

 

So I will be getting tax credits for that year worked out on a annual salary of 20500.

 

Now I thought it would work out like this as this will be the salary I will get from April 2010

25 weeks of SMP = £576.50 (this is based on SMP figure for 2009, £123.06).

27 weeks of normal pay = £442.30 per week x 27 = 11942

 

so total salary for 2010 minus the £100 each week ignored for SMP is = £12518.50

 

If anyone can clear this up for me I would be so grateful,

 

thank you

andrea

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it will definatley go on the estimated amount you will earn for the period you are on mat leave.

 

You will have to give the year previous figures from your p60 but it'll go on the estimated amount because its significantly lower.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...