Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • and as expected   UK rejects mobility agreement with Europe to help young people travel and live abroad WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Labour also rejected the possibility of an EU-wide scheme for young people a Government spokesperson said there was no interest from the UK side, adding that “free movement (for UK plebs) within the EU was ended”.
    • Yep, I agree with what you are saying, I only mentioned the governing body code of practice as a nod to the fact that I wasn't dismissing the BPA or whoever out of hand, thought that would go in my favour before a judge. I wrote a long post about the BPA CoP earlier but then deleted it because I realised I wasn't talking about points of law but a set of guidelines drawn up by one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans. It is ludicrous that the 5 minute consideration period doesn't apply if the motorist parks, such nonsense. As for legislation, I was referring to the government legislation (if it is legislation?) document which has been withdrawn. Does that stand until it has been reintroduced? In the explanatory document it is quite clear. Otherwise, how does one hold them to the consideration and grace periods? Or is that at the discretion of the judge?
    • Thank you all   JK, I agree; if they were to accept my full claim today, then the interest would be around 8-9 pounds. If I were them, I would have offered to pay the interest and said no to the 12 pounds for the letters. These have not been mentioned, which is my mistake.   As you pointed out, if the judge were to award at 4% and I did not get the letters, I would get less.   Bank, thank you. I do hear what you are saying. If I am to continue with this, then I will need to pay an additional trial fee of £59. If I win everything, then great, but if I win less the claim and court fee, then I lose out. I am not sure what the judge will think about the interest. I think we have to remember that I won the item and, therefore, did not pay a penny for it. Yes, I have had to purchase an additional one, but maybe the judge will hold this against me. I am content that this is a win. I have not signed any non-disclosure clauses, and they do not ask for this either in their offer. 
    • Are you saying that both businesses were closed? Yet you stayed there for over two hours. . If both were closed than to charge £100 is a penalty since Horizon had no legitimate interest in keeping spaces clear for the company. sake as there were no customers..
  • 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

interview under caution .... help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5303 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 can understand that this is stressful.

However, the IUC is your chance to give your account of what has gone on. You will be able to show e council any supporting documents to back up what you are saying, and the tapes will be sealed. Take a freind along.

 

The Council has to conduct an investigation to establish what is going on... and as they have been given different sources. Only one of those can be right! They need to establish which one, and why the other gave the incorrect information.

 

They suspect you MAY have committed an offence, hence the IUC.

 

Don't panic, just have a think what evidence you can produce that backs up you being at the house untill august and take it along

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thankyou for your reply, i do have signed receipts for rent etc up until Aug, my other worry is , the council official when i asked what action would she take next she said she would speak to the neighbours. it was a very private road and i would be suprised if they even knew my name as i wouldnt know who lives in those houses, the fact im out on the 630 bus every morning and home late, no car and sleep at my parents most weekends im scared she will use this as some kind of evidence but then again maybe people notice me more than i do them! :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rent receipts is good.

When is your interview? If it is a while away ring and ask if it can be brought forward (they may not be able to do this, but it can't hurt to ask) like a lot of things, it pobbaly worse thking about it than actually going along.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My interview is next Monday, unfortunately i am a worrier :-( i cant wait for the interview and hopefuly put an end to all this, i am seeking legal representation to attend the interview with me as with reading various posts i dont want to be intimidated into admitting to something i havent done!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Angela Atkinson (48) of Stonebridge NW10 entered a plea of guilty to two charges of benefit fraud, contrary to s111A Social Security Administration Act 1992 at Brent Magistrates Court on the 6 January.

 

Atkinson received a Community Punishment Order of 180 hours and was ordered to pay £75 towards costs after it was revealed that she had been claiming housing and council tax benefit since at least 2 May 2005 on the basis that she was a single unemployed person and that her only income was from Jobseekers Allowance. During this time she was employed as a full time Customer Service Officer with Barnett Homes Ltd (20/03/06 to 16/03/07). Working an average of 36 hours per week she took home a monthly salary of £1313.00.

 

Despite being employed on a full time basis she failed to notify the Department of Works and Pensions (DWP) or the London Borough of Brent about this employment and was overpaid housing benefit, council tax benefit and jobseekers allowance between 11 April 2006 to 12 March 2007 amounting to £6828.01.

 

In another case Kerry Graham (34) of Broadfield Close, London, NW2 pleaded guilty to five charges of benefit fraud, contrary to s111A Social Security Administration Act 1992. She received a 100-hours community punishment order from Brent Magistrates Court on the 2 December 2008. She was also asked to pay £75 towards legal costs.

 

Graham had been claiming income support, housing and council tax benefit since at least December 1998 on the basis that she was an unemployed single person and that her only income was money received from the Department of Works and Pensions. Information from the DWP showed that Miss Graham had been working for CPM Field Marketing and Deeset Confectionary Ltd from February 2005 to October 2006. Her earnings were anything up to £150 per week. The total overpayment of income support, housing and council tax benefit amounted to £4,079.49.

 

In the final case, Adekunle Ogunnusi (42) of The Avenue, Wembley, Middx, HA9 entered a plea of guilty to seven charges of benefit fraud, contrary to s111A Social Security Administration Act 1992 at Brent Magistrates Court. Ogunnusi received a 52-week suspended jail sentence on condition that he commit no further offences whatsoever in the UK in the next two years. He was also handed 250 hours unpaid work over the next twelve months and told to complete a rehabilitation programme.

 

Investigators discovered that Ogunnusi had declared that he was not related to his landlady, Arinola Yahaya of 35 Holland Road, London, W14 but investigators found that he was married to this woman. They have two children and were in fact living as a family at the address. He is also subject to a supervisory order over the next year and has been ordered to pay £1500 towards the legal costs at the rate of £100 per month.

 

Adekunle Ogunnusi had been claiming housing and council tax benefit since at least 18 April 1999 on the basis that he was a single man in receipt of a low income. He declared employment with Genesis Flooring of Finchley Road, London, but investigations established that he was never employed with Genesis Flooring. The total overpayment of housing and council tax benefit amounted to £32,815.60 during the period April 1999 to September 2004.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a worrier too so I understand how hard it is. The one good thing about being a worrier is (well, for me anyway) is it is never usually as bad as i had convinced myself that it is going to be!

 

Taking legal rep is allways a good idea. Please remember that the interviewer is a human being doing a job. They are not all out to trick people/trip them up, but do have to challenge what is said to them from time to time- they can't accept everything at face value and if soomething needs clarifying, it's their job do to it. This can be done in a pleasant and professional way and should be.

 

It may well be the the interviewer accepts what you have to say based on the information and documents that you provide. I don't have all the facts on your case so can't really say either way but your legal adviser should be able to say when he/she has seen all the paper.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LMS... your situation is very different to those in Korous's post. But fo what it's worth, i don't think it's a very sensitive post.

Not everyone who is interviewed is found to have done anything wrong. And even if evidence of a offence emerges at interview not everyone goes to court.

You worry about you & no one else.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lil miss stressedkouros ... have you sent me that to tip me over the edge??????

 

 

Do the sums. These Brent people are like £4000 to £6000 CONVICTED Housing Benefit fraud cases and get 100 to 200 hours community service and £75 costs.

No sign of a FINE.:-D

 

R v Stewart and others (1987) is the basis for how much you suffer if found guilty. The splitting point is 10k inflation adjusted from 1987 so if you are facing £30k plus then oh dear ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

i see what your getting at ... i think! dates in question is between dec - aug , so at a push i would have recieved far far less than £4000 , to be honest the whole stress of it all i feel like just offering them the cash back ! id pay a grand just to hav a good night sleep at the min

;-( unfortunately im not in the financial situation to do that !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don worry sweetie, if you have proof from your landlord and rent receipts then thats all they are interested in, as for going to your neighbours this is usually a ploy to get you to confess if you were doing what they think you were doing. Have a word with your local CAB they may be able to get some one to come along with you to help you understand what is going on and put your mind at rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, looks like you have nothing to really worry about, but I am waiting to attend an interview under caution and I am utterly terrified! They think I owe £800 due to over payments of housing benefit. My problem is that my pay fluctuates by as much as £150 on a monthly basis but I was told to only send in wage slip when I got two of a similar amount - which hasn't happened for months! So i was really pleased when they said I was getting a home visit 'cos I really needed to talk to someone as the whole situation seemed wrong to me. The home visit was delayed by weeks 'cos the lady coming to see me became ill and we had to reschedule. By the time she saw me I had a couple of higher than average wage slips that she looked at. She seemed fine, advised me to send in 2 wage slips when they stablised again and that was it. Until I got notice of my IUC that is! Am so stressed and upset, so I do sympathise with you, it's a horrible position to be in . But you will be fine , you re in the right!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

LMS. How did you actually pay your rent? If it was by direct debit, bank statements will show that you were paying rent too.

Just remember you are only being interviewed because they suspect an interview MAY have been committed.

Please do not ask me for advice via PM as I will not reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i paid my rent via direct debit up until dec (my landlord was travelling during this time so was convenient )and then paid cash once he was back in the country as that arrangement suited me better (i have been through bankruptcy so always deal in cash whenever possible) which i have signed receipts for .... the reason i am worrying is although i appreciate the woman is doing her job i sincerely dont have a clue on what evidence she could possibly have apart from some words on a doorstep to speak to me like a criminal , have me in for an interview , tell my ex landlord im being investigated (isnt that breaching confidentiality??) im far too embarrased to share this with my best friends only my mum knows so hopefuly my ex landlord hasnt gone around gossiping :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...