Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
    • cause like you said in post one, 99% of people think these are FINES (it now reads charge). and wet themselves and cough up. they are not, they are speculative invoices because the driver supposedly broke some imaginary contract by driving onto privately owned land which said owner may or may not have signed some 99% fake contract with a private parking co years ago, thats already expired or has not been renewed or annually paid to employ them dx  
  • 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

Benefit Fraud Interview Under Caution - worried sick


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5191 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

misskrumbo, I understand that you're upset, but there's no need to take it out on other caggers, IMO. You don't sound calm to me at the moment, sorry.

 

As Loopinlouie isn't here to defend herself, and as you only joined us yesterday and may not have read all the threads, I promise you we do have some kind and helpful DWP people, who try to advise worried people on this forum, in their own time.

 

If this wasn't Damsel's thread, I would be unsubbing. You might consider starting your own, as this thread is about Damsel's problems.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Misskrumbo,you are entitled to your thoughts and opinions but keep them civil.

This is a job someone has to do-and its in the interests of all those who are honest,that it is.

 

Only those who have things to hide or else are legitimate targets for investigation should feel the need to be concerned-because they will be caught and rightly dealt with appropriately.

 

Its unfortunate that along the way,the innocent can sometimes feel targetted for no reason,but those who are responsible for abuse have made the rules.

 

Just look at this from all angles.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought at first as said you were inspiring. I for one do not work for the dwp, most posters here will have gathered that and if you want a true picture of how those who work for the dwp do help out, click on my username and into statistics and search for threads started by me, one titled confused.

 

You will see I came to this site uninformed of my entitlements and nervous of an overpayment which was not my fault. I after a few pages became reassured and was helped by a number of people from different areas and later I realised at least a couple were dwp employees. They also picked up on something welfare rights had tried to help me with and encouraged me to chase another benefit, I now get that money.

 

If they were so bad they wouldnt have troubled themselves to help out, but you see they do care and want to help people who dont know their rights get help.

 

Whilst I do not feel all in the dwp is fair and some innocent are caused a great deal of stress, I do not in any way think it fair to blame the employees. Thats my own experience:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Misskrumbo, its a shame that your '**** HOT Criminal Lawyer' gave you incorrect advice.

 

Yes both the DWP and local authority can demand copies of your bank statements under the Social Security Fraud Act 1997. They do have to make an application and give their reasons as to why they feel that a fraud may have been committed.

 

The DWP also do speak to the UKBA and what is called a 'memorandum of understanding' between both government departments has been signed and agreed by the top people so that information can be passed between departments

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Every body who is chattin on this site has got problems concerning the title.

why dont you pull your head back in, you are boring me now.

We know dams has got some problems, i understand her.

but where there is a will there is a way. Or do you not agree.

Whats wrong with tryin to Boost dams confidence. She should be told that there is nothing wrong in fighting back. Better to fight back than lose everything. Its ok saying poor dams. I am saying appeal fight back.

Do what you have to do to protect yourself from these Bottom feeders, (investigators) Try every trick in the book, And after 12 wks go to the local government omsbudsman, and complain to them, she could even ring them now for a chat and ask what there opinion is.

Do you know somthing i think you are one of them. May be D.W.P. or some other agency.

My advice to anybody is fight back, at least you learning along the way.

Has anybody ever had experience of a decent crimminal solicitor on legal aid.

If any body wants one i would be pleased to give a number to you.

She spent one hour talking me through the legalities of this investigation stuff right through to what they can and can not do or say to you. About court stuff the lot. All for free, Then about the process of legal aid.:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with a good old fashioned debate?

Truth hurts the investigators. what ever happened to innocent till proven guilty. AND DECIDED BY THE BRITISH COURT OF LAW.

Whats wrong with the right to freedom of speach!

Whats wrong is the invasion of privacy, and a lack of respect to our human rights.

Blah Blah Blah.

And no i wont watch it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be silly i aint upset, thanks for your concern though!

Why should i get my own thread, excuse me.

Boosting dam's confidence.

Have you lot come up with any real help for her yet.

whats up have all the investigators come home from work now or what?

You investigators are not the only guy's with a voice.

But you get a kick out of makin sure people lose there homes and possesions,

all day long, then what do you do? feel guilty and get on sites like this and dish out advice on how to solve peoples problems that you cause.

So whats your expert advice to dam's.

You are a strange breed of humanity!:grin::grin::grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Misskrumbo, I sent you a private message earlier. I can only assume that you have not yet read it. If you are having trouble accessing your private messages, please let me know.

 

For the benefit of anyone who has not yet read the forum rules, they are here.

 

Now Damselindistress, let's get back to your thread.

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

Damsel, I haven't forgotten that this is your thread. Did you see the solicitor today and has it helped? I hope so.

 

I hope so too Damsel. I'm unsure of the intricacies of the IUC process but feel that you should also draw attention to your health problems as a mitigating factor.

 

My personal approach would be one of damage limitation. You've done something you clearly regret (which one of us hasn't at some point in our life??) and I think it would be best for you to put this behind you as quickly as you (and the DWP of course) possibly can and move forward.

 

If the Housing Association remain intransigent about increasing their percentage of home ownership then I would be inclined to take in a lodger as you have previously touched upon. There are tax breaks for this and so long as your house is safe and clean then I wouldn't be overly concerned about any other costly modifications.

 

Best wishes!! :wink:

Edited by WelshMam2009
spelling

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with a good old fashioned debate?

Truth hurts the investigators. what ever happened to innocent till proven guilty. AND DECIDED BY THE BRITISH COURT OF LAW.

Whats wrong with the right to freedom of speach!

Whats wrong is the invasion of privacy, and a lack of respect to our human rights.

Blah Blah Blah.

And no i wont watch it!

 

 

 

Absolutely nothing wrong with debate.... in the right place at the right time. These threads are not meant for debate, they're meant for help and advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

" i SPOKE TO THE CRIMMINAL SOLICITOR. She told me that they can not get into my bank account and could not go to immagration. I have not been out of this country in five years. " quote by misskrumbo

 

 

 

This is categorically not true. As an investigator I can have access to both of these things as long as I can justify the intrusion.

 

I also personally welcome a solicitor in an IUC, as they can often advise the interviewee to be sensible if they are guilty and my evidence is overwhelming. If the interviewee has a compelling story or my evidence is weak or I have misinterpreted it they are useful in helping things get sorted. Contrary to popular belief, I want the right outcome: I have no vested interest in getting a result by trickery or underhand means. Evidence is everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way.....an administrative Penalty is 30% of the overpayment, not 20 as previously quoted. It is not negotiable.

 

Correct. My error. This is why it's probably a good job a request had to be sent to someone else to work the 30% out for me:roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries mate.

 

Also, criminal solicitors are great at their jobs. However, they often haven't got a clue how the benefit system works. They will ensure PACE is adhered to etc, but it is often not their area of expertise. An interviews on tape for everyones benefit, it means that everything said is available verbatim.

Edited by tabs666
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting quite paranoid about the number of invetigators - past or present - infiltrating the forum!

Seriously though, as long as you give good and helpfull info it's nice to see things from an official perspective. [i'm far too used to posting on the bailiff forum where life is not so genteel!]

Best wishes.

Rae.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAG welcomes all people here, staff or claimants so long as the forum rules are adhered to by all parties, there isn't an issue.

 

I'm sure there are many investigators frequenting the forums who don't post as well as those who do, so don't let it unnerve you Kelcou.

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

Several posts, totally unrelated to Damsel's post and completely unhelpful to her have yet again, been removed. Posts in response to this disruption have also been removed as they make no sense on their own, now that the disruptive postings have been taken out from the thread.

 

Back on topic......

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...