Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Accused of Benefit Fraud by Income Support


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4864 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

The issue here appears to be the letter they sent you, and whether it related to your employment or another change of circumstances. There is also the issue of the time period between commencing employment and informing them of this. One thing which makes no sense is how you know they think you owe them £15000.00. They don't usually work out an overpayment until it has been established that fraud has actually been committed, and how long for. As they haven't finalised their investigation it hasn't been established.

 

This is an example of a SAR:

 

SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998

 

My REF: (National Insurance Number)

 

Please supply me with copies of all data that you hold on me. This includes in particular, but is not limited to, the following:-

 

1. A copy of the initial original signed claim form.

2. Where there has been any event which has required manual intervention by any person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention.

3. Copies of letters exchanged between Income Support and myself in relation to all aspects of my business with you since the commencement of my initial claim.

4. Copies of all Recorded phonecalls exchanged between Income Support and myself since the commencement of my original claim.

I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply.

 

If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity, please let me know by return. However, please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

If their letter does refer to your employment and this can be proven, there may well be an overpayment but it won't be recoverable as there was no failure on your part to inform them, and the error is theirs - although they may be able to recover the sum overpaid between the date you commenced employment and the date you informed them.

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

You can ask them if they can defer the interview if you need to seek further advice from a solicitor or Welfare Rights Officer ect. but it's very unlikely that they will reschedule the IUC at this short notice, and certainly not for over 40 days, which is how long Income Support have to comply with your request.

 

I can't tell you what to do at the interview but I can give you an idea of what to expect.

 

You do not have to go to the IUC, you are not obligated to go. However this will not stop their investigation. I always say to people to go, see what it is about, and if you want to seek further advise once you know what it is about, then you simply tell them you want to leave and seek advice from your solicitor/welfare rights officer/other third party. You can leave the IUC any time you wish. Whether you go or not is your decision, it isn't one anyone can make for you.

 

You can take someone with you. You can take a solicitor or you can take an advisor such as a Welfare Rights Officer, CAB worker etc (you can find these people through your local council, it is a free service and it is not in any manner associated with the departments which pay your benefit or investigate benefit fraud). You can also take a friend or family member with you, so long as they are not part of the investigation. Anyone who is not in an official capacity (family friend for example) cannot speak for you or ask questions or guide you in your answers, they can only provide moral support, or they will be asked to leave.

 

Things to take with you:

 

 

  • Bank statements of all accounts you have
  • Tax Credit Award notice
  • Childcare contract/receipts for childcare
  • Rent agreement
  • Council Tax Bill
  • Payslips
  • Employment contract

Anything else related to your finances or related to your communication with them about your benefit (letters from them to you, or copies of letters you have sent to them, if you have them)

 

You do not have to take these with you. However it will show the investigating officers that you are as keen to get this sorted as they are, and that you are not trying to hide anything. They may have accessed this information already, but not always. If you have them with you, they can eliminate other possibilities if they haven't yet accessed that information.

 

 

In an IUC, it is taped. You are entitled to a copy of that tape upon request. The copy they will keep for their records will be placed in a sealed bag, which you will witness. They are not allowed to intimidate you - and they wouldn't be so daft to as it is on tape. Some of the questions may seem accusotory or uncomfortable, but they are there to get to the bottom of things. The people who conduct the interview will begin by explaining how the interview will go - they will advise that you are under caution, advise you of your right to remain silent, ect and advise you that the interview will be recorded.

 

They may show you a copy of the form you completed when you applied for benefit, and ask if you understand the conditions of your claim (the need to report a change of circumstances, increase in income etc). They will ask if you have anything you wish to declare that is not on your form.

 

They will tell you what they suspect you are doing that is fraudulent, and they will invite you to respond to this. You may be shown evidence they have gathered in the course of their investigation and be asked if you wish to explain it. Remember, evidence is not always cut and dry. If they show you something which is completely innocent but looks damning, say so. Don't be afraid to speak up. Tell them - explain. This is your opportunity to tell them your side. You must always remember also that you are not obliged to say anything. You can stay silent, as is your right. You can also request a break if you are finding it uncomfortable and you also have the right to leave at any time. If you feel nervous, your mouth can go very dry - ask for a glass of water if this happens, and they will accomodate this.

 

They are not allowed to intimidate you in any way, and the interview is recorded, but only an auditory recording, so if the officers do anything that makes you feel uncomfortable for example: lean over you, speak up for the purpose of the tape. "Could you please step back a bit, I don't feel comfortable when you stand over me like that" they are unlikely to ask why it makes you uncomfortable but if they do, "Because you are a perfect stranger and I feel uncomfortable with you being this close to me" - that way it is recorded on the tape that although they said nothing intimidating, their body language made you uncomfortable. Please don't let this frighten you - it is unlikely they would stand over you, and if they did they probably would not realise they were making you uncomfortable - I am simply making you aware that you can speak up in the event that you do feel uncomfortable.

  • Haha 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...